By Kirby Lewis-Gill, Site Development Director, Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development
For years, economic developers have spent a lot of time talking about site readiness.
We encouraged communities to think ahead. Control land before a project appears. Complete due diligence early. Plan for infrastructure. Know what companies need before they start looking.
In Tennessee, that message seems to have landed.
Over the past year, I reviewed feedback from economic development professionals across the state. One thing stood out almost immediately.
Local leaders understand site readiness better than ever.
They are talking about utility redundancy, wastewater capacity, grading plans, transportation access, speculative development and development timelines. These are the same topics that come up in conversations with site selectors and industrial developers.
That is a good thing.
But another theme showed up just as often.
Many communities know exactly what they need to do. They just do not always have the resources to do it.
Site Development is No Longer a Niche Activity
Not long ago, many communities approached industrial recruitment in a reactive way.
A prospect would appear. Someone would identify a piece of property. Then the community would begin figuring out whether the site could actually support development. Today, many places think differently.
They recognize that industrial competitiveness starts years before a project arrives. They know the importance of due diligence, infrastructure planning, utility capacity, transportation access and the reality of true long-term investment.
This means local leaders are thinking more strategically about their future. It also means expectations are higher than they used to be and obtaining grant funding is more and more competitive.
The Gap Between Knowledge and Capacity
The most consistent theme I saw in the survey was not a lack of understanding. It was a lack of capacity.
Many communities have a clear grasp of what modern industrial projects require. They know what makes a site competitive. They know where improvements are needed. What they often lack is the staff, funding, technical expertise, engineering support or infrastructure necessary to move projects forward.
In other words, local knowledge is growing faster than local capacity.
That gap shows up in different ways. Some communities have strong sites but limited utility capacity. Others have available land but lack the financial resources needed to complete due diligence or infrastructure improvements. Others know which sites should be developed but struggle to move projects from planning to execution.
These are different problems, but they point to the same issue. The challenge is no longer helping communities understand site readiness, it’s helping them act on what they already know.
Infrastructure is Becoming the Main Constraint
If there was one issue that appeared throughout the survey more than any other, it was infrastructure.
Water and wastewater capacity came up repeatedly. So did electric service, utility redundancy, transportation improvements and the cost of extending infrastructure to undeveloped land.
Many communities have land. Fewer have infrastructure that can support modern industrial projects.
And infrastructure projects move slowly. Permitting takes time. Funding takes time. Construction takes time. Meanwhile, companies often make location decisions on much shorter timelines.
The result is a growing gap between development opportunities and infrastructure readiness. Infrastructure readiness is becoming a competitive issue rather than simply a utility issue.
Regions that can align infrastructure planning with long term economic development goals will be in a much stronger position than those forced to react after an opportunity appears.
Preserving Industrial Land
Concern about industrial land surfaced repeatedly as well.
Local leaders talked about rising land prices, fragmented ownership, residential encroachment and the difficulty of acquiring property before development pressure arrives.
These are not new issues. Many fast-growing states face them. What makes this different is that industrial land is much easier to preserve than it is to replace.
Jonathan Gemmen, Senior Director at Austin Consulting and Tennessee’s consultant for site development programs, often says, “The best thing that can happen on an industrial site is $1 billion in capital investment. The second-best thing that can happen is nothing.”
There is a lot of truth in that statement.
Once a property is developed for another use, it is often gone for good. Communities need to think more intentionally about protecting long-term industrial opportunities before growth makes those decisions for them.
The Future May Require More Than Funding
One of the more interesting findings from the survey was that many communities are asking for something beyond funding.
They want guidance.
They want help prioritizing sites.
They want help sequencing infrastructure investments.
They want help evaluating development opportunities and making long-term decisions.
They want help turning plans into projects.
Grant funding will always be crucial to communities. But many communities are facing increasingly complex decisions. In some cases, technical expertise may be just as valuable as financial assistance.
Looking Ahead
The survey left me optimistic.
Economic development organizations across Tennessee understand the importance of site readiness. They are thinking more strategically about industrial development than they were ten years ago. They are making better use of the tools available to them.
That is real progress.
The next phase of site development is not about awareness. Most communities already know what needs to happen.
The next phase is about execution.
It is about infrastructure.
It is about capacity.
It is about helping communities move from knowing what to do to actually doing it.
The communities that succeed will not necessarily be the ones that know the most. They will be the ones that can turn that knowledge into action.