HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 06-03-2008-3bORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: June 3, 2008
Action Agenda.
Item No. 3=~
SUBJECT: Sanford Holshouser Economic Impact Analysis of the Buckhorn Village Project
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
Sanford Holshouser Report
(Under Separate Cover)
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Willie Best, 245-2300
Craig Benedict, 245-2592
PURPOSE: To receive the report as comment and evidence regarding Buckhorn Village
Planned Development and Special Use Permit.
BACKGROUND: In November, 2007 the BOCC authorized the Manager's Office to hire
Sanford Holshouser to conduct economic development services.
The Sanford Holshouser Business Development Group, LLC, is an economic development
consulting firm that provides action planning, site selection services, and unique strategies to
communities, organizations, and companies worldwide.
Sanford Holshouser has analyzed existing data submitted for the Buckhorn Village Planned
Development and .submitted the attached report. The Planning staff submitted the report and an
additional qualification document, on May 7 and May 9 respectively, to the Planning Board as
additional written materials to be considered in the Buckhorn Village PUD application process.
The author of this report is available for questions, if necessary.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost of the study was funded through the Manager's Office.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the report, ask
questions, and otherwise as the Board decides.
Economic Impact Analysis
of the
Buckhorn Village Project
o~
Orange County, North Carolina
~~~
ti
~~
May 2008
c®~.®n~.c n~.act alysis ® the
uc ®~n il~ae reject
on
range C®unty, ®rt ar®l~na
~~.
~j ~~r~%
Developed by
z5':'.
pp} ; ..
t~ P.
+,s,~
The Sanford Holshouse;r
Business'Devel;opmen~ Grqup
TM1..,.1 ._._ ...,.r 'R ....~
PO Box 5646, Cary, NC 27512
www.sanfordholshouser.com
May 2008
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Table of Contents
Executive Summary______________
Project Overview.
2
--------------------------
5
Property Tax Impact---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------6
Lodging Tax Analysis------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------9
Retail Sales Tax Analysis-------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------10
Retail Economic Review--------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------11
Employment and Wages Analysis.------------------------------------------------------ -----------------------15
Construction Impact---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------18
Cost of Public Services: Public Safety, Infrastructure________________________ _______________________ 18
Housing and Schools--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18
Benefits of Opening New Economic Development Zoned Land_______________________________20
Spin-Off Businesses---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------21
Environmental Impact----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21
Methodology -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
Appendix: Orange County Land Use Map of Development Area_____________________________23
References------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------24
The Sanford Holshouser Business Development Group Information
Sanford Holshouser ~ 1
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Executive Summary
Orange County engaged The Sanford Holshouser Business Development Group (Sanford
Holshouser) to examine the economic impact of the proposed Buckhorn Village project on
Orange County and the local economy. Buckhorn Village is a proposed 130-acre mixed use
development at Buckhorn Road and I-85/I-40. The development plans call for 1,133 people to be
employed at an anchor retailer, restaurants, hotels, and other retail businesses. The plans also call
for 200 multi-family residential units. This study reviewed impacts on tax revenue streams of
Orange County, public services, housing, employment, and other economic factors.
In summary, the $143 million proposed development is projected to create $1,348,208 in
net new annual property tax revenue to Orange County upon build out. In addition to property
tax revenue, retail sales tax revenue will be increased by almost $6 million annually. Currently,
about half of the $41 million in annual retail sales tax revenue collected is realized by the
County. The remaining half is distributed to municipalities. Lodging tax revenue will see an
approximate $92,000 in net new annual revenue. The total annual tax impact on Orange County
is projected to be $4.4 million. In addition to ongoing economic impact, the construction phase is
projected to generate $875,000 in new retail sales tax for Orange County and create 9321oca1
construction jobs (Barnes, 2008).
The retail and hospitality sectors are important to Orange County's economy, providing
jobs, entertainment, and keeping disposable income in the County. Research found that the
Orange County retail market is underserved with fewer retail establishments than comparable
counties. Low per capita retail sales show that dollars are being leaked to neighboring counties.
Orange County has a low median household disposable income to retail sales ratio, again
showing that disposable income dollars are leaving the community. A smaller percentage of
Sanford Holshouser 2
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Orange County's workforce is employed in retail and accommodation and food service sectors
than comparable counties.
Every economic development project has associated costs and those costs are reviewed in
this report. The cost to Orange County's public services (public safety, infrastructure) is limited
to a short time frame as the City of Mebane is planning to annex the area within one year of
construction initiation or at Certificate of Occupancy. There will be minimal cost during the
short time Orange County is responsible for public services. Impact on schools due to new
housing is also limited. Retail and hospitality wages are not "bread-winning" or "relocation"
wages. Except for a few management positions, people will likely not relocate for these jobs. The
planned 200 multi-family residential units associated with the development, if occupied by new
residents with school-aged children, will have a minor impact on Orange County schools. A
review of environmental permits shows that other than standard development permits, the project
will require no special air or water quality permits beyond adhering to `Neuse River Rules.'
In addition to the direct tax impacts described above, there are indirect benefits of
economic development projects. In the case of Buckhorn Village, infrastructure extensions will
open an economic development zoned area for future growth. This area has been designated in
the County's land use plan for commercial and industrial development since 1981. There will
also be economic spin-off to small businesses and entrepreneurs who can provide services to the
development such as landscaping, security, and maintenance.
Orange County, like most North Carolina communities, is keenly focused on sustainable
development and creating a live, work, play community. The leakage of retail dollars indicate
that Orange County citizens are driving to neighboring communities to shop. Creating retail
centers in the County will keep more residents shopping local while keeping local retail sales
Sanford Holshouser 3
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
dollars home. Additionally, keeping retail dollars local encourages small business development
and job creation. Creating jobs locally will combat the high rate of out-commuting which leads
to clogged roads and transportation costs. Orange County services for residential development
are subsidized by tax revenue from commercial and industrial development (Renkow, 2006) to
the magnitude of $4 to $1. Without economic development, Orange County citizens will bear an
increasing proportion of the cost of public services. Finally, Orange County has in place land use
and growth management plans that were developed through the pubic process. The Buckhorn
Village project is consistent with Orange County growth plans; will provide significant increases
to tax revenues with minimal, limited short-term cost to public services; and will keep more
Orange County citizens working and shopping locally.
Sanford Holshouser 4
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Project Overview
Buckhorn Village is a proposed 130-acre mixed-use development at the Buckhorn Road
interchange on I-85/I-40 in Orange County. The proposed development will be located in a
designated economic development zone and its mixed-uses include an anchor retail
establishment, restaurants (15), hotels (2), and additional retail shops (55 - 65) totaling
approximately 1.14 million square feet of commercial space. Once fully development, Buckhorn
Village will employ an estimated 1,133 people. Construction of the proposed development is
planned to begin in 2009.
At this time the site is not located within a municipality; however, it is within the
probably annexation area of the City of Mebane, primarily located in Alamance County. The
City of Mebane and Orange County have a 2004 agreement that suggests that the City annex the
site within one year of initiation of construction or by separate agreement. This agreement also
specifies that Mebane will serve the site with water and wastewater service. Other utilities will
be provided by private entities, or in the case of electricity, by an investor owned or cooperative
power supplier.
Economic and demographic data cited in this report was obtained from multiple sources.
Data on the Buckhorn Village development was provided by project developers, East West
Partners. Other information was gathered from public and private research sources. The
consulting team reviewed "Economic Impact of Buckhorn Village, Orange County, NC,"
developed by Zakia Barnes, a University of North Carolina graduate student for the Chapel Hill
Chamber of Commerce, and "The Cost of Community Services in Orange County," developed by
NC State University for background information.
Sanford Holshouser 5
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Throughout this report, comparisons are made between Orange County and a group of
counties similar in geographic location, economy, or position to a core urban area. Chatham,
Durham, Alamance, and Wake Counties are compared because they are adjacent to Orange
County and, therefore, share a workforce and a local economy. Johnston, and Cabarrus Counties
are included because they are similarly situated to core urban areas. Johnston County is adjacent
to Wake County and Cabarrus County is adjacent to Mecklenburg County.
Orange County is located on I-85 and I-40 in the Triangle region of North Carolina. The
County seat is Hillsborough and other incorporated municipalities include Carrboro, Chapel Hill,
and small parts of Durham (also in Durham County) and Mebane (also in Alamance County).
Total County population is estimated to be 124,599 in 2007..
Population
Coun 2000 2006 2007 st.
Oran e 115,537 123,766 124,599
Alamance 130,794 139,789 144,506
Chatham 49,334 57,707 59,765
Durham 223,306 246,824 254,733
Wake 627,865 790,007 811,478
Cabarrus 131,030 157,179 159,612
Johnston 121,900 151,589 155,954
Source: NC State Data Center, 2006 Certified Population Estimates, US Census, ESRI
Property Tax Impact
The tables below show various projected property tax revenue impacts of the Buckhorn
Village project on Orange County. The information to conduct the analysis was gathered from
Orange County and East West Partners, the project development group. The figures will change
if the scope of the project is changed but the same methodology can be used to develop estimates
based on the new information.
Sanford Holshouser 6
Orange. County: Buckhorn Village
The project developer conducted a survey of existing retail establishments. The survey
determined an average property tax value per square foot of anchor/destination retail space,
mixed and multi-tenant retail space, and hotel facilities. These three categories were used based
on the projected uses of Buckhorn Village commercial square footage. The existing business
average values were applied to the mix of uses of the Buckhorn Village project. From this
analysis, an estimate of property tax revenue to Orange County was projected.
A.nchor/Destination Retail
Property Total Square Feet Property Tag Value Property Tax
Value Per SF
Meadowmont Harris Teeter 49,427 $5,455,135 $110.37
Hillsborou h Wa1-Mart 168,709 $12,758,748 $75.63
Hillsborou h Home De of 104,769 $8,933,910 $85.27
Total 322,905 $27,147,793
Avera e Tax Value Per SF $84.07
Source: Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC Survey
Miged/Multi-Tenant Retail
Property Total Square Feet Property Tax Value Property Tag
Value Per SF
Meadowmont Vilia e Center 108,586 $17,122,797 $157.69
Wal-Mart Ou arcel 12,640 $1,852,006 $146.52
Wal-Mart Ou arcel 26,165 $2,678,176 $102:36
Timberl ne Sho in Center 104,656 $12,351,026 $118.02
MLK and I-40 Harris Teeter 96,511 $11,667,110 $120.89
Totals 348,558 $45,671,115
Avera e Tax Value Per SF $131.03
Source: Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC Survey
Sanford Holshouser 7
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Hotels
Property Total Square Feet Property Tax Value Property Tax
Value Per SF
Hillsborough Holiday Inn
Ex ress 28,496 $3,616,177 $126.90
Chapel Hill Holiday Inn
Ex ress 45,523 $5,678,152 $124.73
Cha el Hill Ham ton Inn 30,450 $6,007,832 $197.30
University Inn -Best
Western 31,209 $3,847,569 $123.28
Totals 135,678 $19,149,730
Avera e Tax Value Per SF $141.14
Source: Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC Survey
Using the survey information from above; an analysis was performed on the proposed
square footage uses of the Buckhorn Village project. The average property tax value per square
foot was applied to the project and an estimate of property tax revenue impact on Orange County
was calculated.
Buckhorn Village Real Estate Tax Analysis
Property Use SF Average Total Orange Estimated
Orange Estimated County Annual
County Property Tax Property Property
Property Value Tax Rate Tax Revenue
Tax Value
Per SF
Anchor/Destination 165,000 $84.07 $13,872,148 $0.0095 $1.31,785
Retail
Mixed/Multi-Tenant 859,000 $131.03 $112,553,686 $0.0095 $1,069,260
Retail
Hotels 120,000 $141.14 $16,936,921. $0.0095 $160,901
Total Estimated $143,362,755 $1,361,946
Pro e Tax Revenue
Source: Calculated from Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC Survey and East West Partners Information
Sanford Holshouser
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Estimate of Net New Revenue
Property Tag Property
Value Tag
Revenue
Existin Buckhorn Villa e Site $1,446,155 $13,738
New Construction and Property $143,362,755 $1,361,946
Im rovements
Net New Revenue $1,348,208
Source: Calculated from Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC Survey and East West Partners Information
It is estimated that Orange County will receive new annual tax revenues from this project
of $1,348,208 upon build-out. The total tax value of the existing multiple (12) retail and hotel
establishments used in the comparative survey is $91,968,638 producing annual tax revenue of
$873,702. The Buckhorn Village project has the potential to individually exceed the tax revenue
of the existing 12 establishments combined. In terms of commercial development, the Buckhorn
Village project is a significant economic development project that will provide a significant
revenue impact to the County.
In addition to property tax revenue to Orange County, Efland Fire District will receive
property tax revenue for one year, after which the site will be annexed by the City of Mebane.
The tax revenue gain to Efland Fire District cannot be calculated at this time because it is
unknown what percentage of construction will be completed, and, therefore, taxable during the
one year it is in the district. However, the district will receive some new property tax revenue for
that one year.
Lodging Tax Analysis
There are two hotels planned for Buckhorn Village. Due to Orange County's lodging tax,
there will be lodging fees generated for the County. Based on 200 hotel rooms and an annual
Sanford Holshouser 9
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
average occupancy of 70%, Orange County would receive $91,980 in net new lodging fees. This
calculation will change if the lodging tax is increased from 2% to 3% as proposed.
Lodging Tag Analysis
Rooms in 2 Average Projected Room Lodging Tag Estimated
New Hotels Daily Room Occupancy Revenue Rate Tag Revenue
Rate
200 $90 70% $4,599,000 2% $91,980
Source: Calculated from Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC Survey and East West Partners Information
dZetail Sales ~'ax Analysis
The largest fiscal impact to Orange County from Buckhorn. Village will be in new retail
sales tax revenue. In fact, retail sales taxes could equal more than four times the net new property
tax revenue. The consulting team conducted an analysis of projected retail sales tax revenue
based on information gathered in the Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC retail survey and
information from East West Partners.
North Carolina levies a 4.5% retail sales tax and counties can levy a 2.5% retail sales tax
which is returned to the county and shared with municipalities. Tax revenue is shared on a per
capita or ad valorem proportional basis. A few counties have additional levies such as a public
transportation levy in Mecklenburg County. Orange County's local sales tax rate is 2.5%.
Retail Sales Tag Analysis
SF Estimated Projected Local Estimated
Sales Per SF Total Sales Sales Tag Tag Revenue
Volume Rate
Anchor/Destination 165,000 $400 $66,000,000 2.5% $1,650,000
Retail
Other RetaiU 859,000 $200 $171,800,000 2.5% $4,295,000
Restaurant
Hotel Food and 120,000 $0.83 $100,000 2.5% $2,500
Bevera e
Total Projected Retail $237,900,000
Sanford Holshouser 10
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Sales
Total Projected Sales $5,947,500
Tax Revenue .
Source: Calculated from Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC Survey and East West Partners Information
Retail Economic Review
The consulting team reviewed existing retail sales and retail sales tax revenue data to
place the above information in context. Retail sales and retail sales tax information was gathered
from the NC Department of Revenue which regularly reports the information in the annual State
Sales and Use Tax Statistics report. Orange County staff report that the County retains about half
of the retail sales tax revenues and the other half is distributed to municipalities.
Orange County Taxable Retail Sales and Retail Sales Tax Collections
2005-2006
Taxable Retail
Sales 2005-2006
Retail Tax
Collections 2006-2007
Taxable Retail
Sales 2006-2007
Retail Tax
Collections
Total $907,564,371 $40,822,603 $948,302,963 $41,765,632
1% $6,181,427 $62,200 $518,533 $5,092
2% and 3% $1,061.982 $25,483 $2,025,017 $53,219
A arel $25,028,824 $1,133,752 $24,800,661 $1,090,740
Automotive $45,934,632 $2,079,808 $52,016,868 $2,3.16,892
Food $330,368,526 $14,949,810 $369,280,198 $16,261,090
Furniture $24,458,457 $1,113,328 $23,000,577 $1,022,947
General Merchandise $173,807,817 $7,856,122 $185,031,160. $8,147,212
Lumber and Building
Materials $154,687,206 $6,992,498 $147,086,886 $6,471,969
Unclassified $146,035,500 $6,609,602 $144,543,063 ~ $6,396,472
Source: NC Department of Revenue, State Sales and Use Tax Statistics For Fiscal Years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007
The above table shows that the estimated retail sales of Buckhorn Village of $237.9
million equals a bit over 25% of the total existing retail sales in the County during 2006-2007.
The development will boost total County retail sales to almost $1.19 billion. Whereas the retail
sales of Buckhorn Village would boost total sales by 25%, retail sales tax revenues would be
increased by 14.2%.
Sanford Holshouser 11
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
The number of retail establishments in Orange County is estimated to be 955 in 2007.
Based on the 2007 population estimate, there are about 130.5 people in Orange County for every
retail establishment. Alamance, Wake, and Cabarrus Counties have lower numbers of persons
per retail establishment than Orange County. Based on this information the Orange County
market place is not saturated with retail establishments given the higher people to establishment
figures of comparable communities.
2007 Retail Establishments
County Number of Retail
Establishments People per
Establishment
Oran e 955 130.5
Alamance 1,176 122.9
Chatham 353 169.3
Durham 1,927 132.2
Wake 6,605 122.9
Cabarrus 1,257 127
Johnston 1,138 137
Source: ESRI
In raw numbers, Orange County's retail sales rank near the bottom of the group. Only
Chatham County's sales are lower and Chatham County's population is significantly less than
Orange County's. This information, along with low people to establishments ratio, makes a case
that Orange County's retail market is underserved and dollars are flowing out of the community.
2006-2007 Taxable Retail Sales and Sales Tax Collections
Counties Taxable Retail
Sales Sales Tax
Collections
Orange $948,302,963 $41,765,632
Alamance $1,371,732,692 $59,966,191
Chatham $301,018,001 $13,214,818
Durham $3,796,970,577 $166,292,584
Wake $11,262,239,398 $494,403,505
Cabarrus $1,882,429,350 $82,429,237
Johnston $1,135,891,639 $49,629,694
Source: NC Department of Revenue, Sales and Use Tax Statistics
Sanford Holshouser 12
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
To give another perspective to the numbers above, a review of per capita statistics were
analyzed. Orange County's retail sales and retail sales tax collections are near the bottom of the
group with only Chatham and Johnston Counties being lower. Alamance County's per capita
sales and tax collections are the neat highest after Orange County. This table reflects, as the ones
above, that the Alamance/Orange County retail marketplace is not saturated and is leaking retail
dollars.
2006-2007 Taxable Retail Sales and Sales Tag Collections Per Capita
County Sales Tax
Collections Retail Sales
Orange $335.20 $7,610.88
Alamance $414.97 $9,492.57
Chatham $221.11 $5,036.69
Durham $652.81 $14,905.69
Wake $609.23 $13,878.67
Cabarrus $516.44 $11,793.78
Johnston $318.24 $7,283.50
Source: NC Department of Revenue, Sales and Use Tax Statistics
The consulting team examined per capita, median household, and median household
disposable income to ascertain the income differentials impact. The table below shows the
income levels of the seven counties. Orange County's per capita income is the second highest;
however, median household and median household disposable income are in the middle of the
group with Durham, Wake, and Cabarrus Counties all higher.
2007 Income Information
County Per Capita Median
Household
Income Median
Household
Disposable
Income
Oran e $35,229 $54,157 $42,268
Alamance $24,308 $48,368 $37,983
Chatham $28,802 $53,182 $41,106
Durham $30,245 $55,861 $43,333
Sanford Holshouser 13
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Wake $36,635 $72,665 $53,787
Cabarrus $27,320 $58,493 . $44,547
Johnston $23,373 $51,896 $39,776
Source: ESRI
2007 Median Household Disposable Income as a ratio to
Retail Sales and Retail Tag Collections
County Retail Tag
Collections Taxable Retail
Sales
Oran e 1:998 1:22,435
Alamance 1:1,578 1:36,114
Chatham 1:321 1:7,322
Durham 1:3,837 1:87,623
Wake 1:9,191 1:209,385
Cabarrus 1:1,850 1:42,257
Johnston 1:1,247 1:28,SS7
Source: ESRI
The consulting team prepared the following ranking to show the impact that differential
income plays in retail sales in the comparable counties. Orange County has the fourth highest
median household disposable income but ranks 6~' in the ratio to retails sales. This is another
indicator of retail leakage.
®range County Rankings
Ranking of Median HH
Disposable
Income
_ ,
1. ,
Wake
2. Cabarrus
3. Durham
4. Oran e
S. Chatham
6. Johnston
7. Alamance
Ranking of Ratio of Med. HH
Dis osable Income to Retail Sales
1. Wake
2. Durham
3. Cabarrus
4. Alamance
S. Johnston
6. Oran e
7. Chatham
Source: Calculations from ESRI Data
Sanford Holshouser 14
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Employment and Wage Analysis
The Buckhorn Village project is estimated to create 1,133 jobs in the retail and the
accommodation and food services sectors. An estimated 300 of the jobs will be employed at an
anchor retailer. Another 515 jobs will be in the mixed retail establishments. Restaurants are
projected to employ 270 and 48 are estimated to be employed at two hotels. This section of the
report analyzes the impact of those jobs on the Orange County economy.
Orange County Labor Force
2006
Annual 2007
Annual March 2008
Total Labor Force 67,334 67,405 67,534
Source: NC Employment Security Commission
When examining the labor force, one particular note of interest showed up. The growth
rate of the labor force has lagged behind the growth rate of the population. Typically, if jobs are
being created as people move into the community, the labor force and population will grow at
approximately the same rate. In Orange County, the annualized labor force growth rate from
2000 to 2007 was 0.58% while the annualized population growth rate over that time was 1.12%,
almost double the labor force rate. Labor force growth is attributed to government employment
as opposed to private sector employment. The 2000 US Census showed that 27% of Orange
County residents out-commute to Durham County. It is expected that more out-commuting is
taking place, given the review of labor force growth as compared to population growth. Orange
County leadership should take note that job creation is important to maintaining a live, work,
play community.
Below are the currently reported employment levels for the retail trade and the
accommodation and food service sectors, those that specifically apply to the Buckhorn Village
Sanford Holshouser 1 S
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
project. Generally referred to as the hospitality sector, it is called the accommodation and food
service sector by the North American Industrial Classification Code system. Both sectors have
shown growth in recent years.
Orange County Employment: Retail and Accommodation and Food Service Sectors
2006 Annual 2007 3Q
Total Em to ment 59,517 62,656
Retail Trade Em to ment 6,473 6,664
Accommodation and Food Service
Em to ment 5,156 5,324
Source: NC Employment Security Commission
The employment figures in the table below show that Orange County has one of the
lower employment percentages in the retail and accommodation and food service sectors. The
rate of 10.6% in retail is second to the bottom following Durham County. The accommodation
and food service percentage at 8.5% is in the middle of the range. This supports that Orange
County has a higher number of accommodation and food service establishments and fewer retail.
People may not shop in Orange County but they do eat and stay overnight.
2007 Third-Quarter Retail and Accommodation and Food Service Employment as a
Percent of Total Employment
County Retail Trade Accommodation and
Food Service
Orange 10.6% 8:5%
Alamance 13.3% 9.6%
Chatham 10.8% 6.1
Durham 7.3% 6.4%
Wake 11.2% 8.2%
Cabarrus 15.6% 10.5%
Johnston 14.1 % 9.3%
Source: NC Employment Security Commission
Another important data point to analyze in this project is wages. Retail and
accommodation and food services wages are among the lowest of any sector, in part, due to the
Sanford Holshouser 16
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
part-time schedule of many of the positions. The average weekly wage in retail trade in Orange
County is $430.31 and $280.79 in the accommodation and food service sector.
Even though retail and accommodation and food service jobs pay less than the average
wage, it does not mean the jobs are unimportant to an economy. Flexible scheduling offered by
these jobs appeal to students, two-parents-working households, seniors, and others. Also, a
portion of every labor market includes unskilled labor desiring entry level positions offering
stable, consistent employment.
The key point garnered from wage information, is that the majority of jobs created by
Buckhorn Village will not be "bread-winning" or "relocation" wages and, therefore, will not
cause people to relocate to Orange County. If the Buckhorn Village project were a technology
company offering average wages of $60,000, it would attract people to relocate. Because of the
lack of incentive for relocation, the impact on schools, residential services, and transportation
will be minimized.
2007 Third-Quarter Wages
County Avg. Retail
Weekly
Wage % of Avg.
Total
Weekly
Wa a Avg. Accomm.
and Food
Service
Weekl Wa a Avg. Total
Weekly
Wage % of Avg.
Total
Weekly
Wa e
Orange $430.31 53.9% $280.79 $798 35.2%
Alamance $430.77 70% $236.75 $61S 38.5%
Chatham $489.50 83.2% $237.34 $S88 40.4%
Durham $438.76 39.7% $313.32 $1,104 28.4%
Wake $519.76 64.2% $283.74 $810 35.1%
Cabarrus $427.72 63.6% $256.49 $672 38.1%
Johnston $420.08 68% $230.53 $618 37.3%
Union $471.28 71.8% $219.60 $6S6 33.5%
Source: NC Employment Security Commission
Sanford Holshouser 17
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Construction Impact
The "Economic Impact of Buckhorn Village, Orange County, NC," report analyzed the
economic impact of the construction phase of the project. The study used an estimated $138
million in construction costs, slightly less than the $143 million figure used for this analysis.
Using the well-known IMPLAN model, the study found that 1,332 jobs would be created during
the construction phase. About 932 of the jobs would be in Orange County and about 400 outside
the County. Additionally, $2.18 million in sales tax revenue would be realized during
construction, of which $875,000 would remain in County. IlVIPLAN is a predictive input-output
model that estimates the effect of an increase in investment on a specified economy.
Cost of Public Services: Public Safety, Infrastructure
The potential impact on Orange County public services was reviewed. In all economic
development projects there are financial impacts on public services. In the case of Buckhorn
Village, public safety services will become the responsibility of the City of Mebane within one
year from the onset of construction or the Certificate of Occupancy, whichever is later. Orange
County will incur minimal public safety cost during the one year construction period. Water and
wastewater services will be provided by the City of Mebane from the outset. Electric,
telecommunications, and natural gas will be provided by private utilities. The County will have
the benefit of the project without the costs associated with public safety and infrastructure.
Housing and Schools
The consulting team reviewed the impact on public schools directly related to potential
new housing. More housing typically means more children in schools and other public service
impacts. The 2006 NC State study of cost of services, "The Cost of Community Services in
Sanford Holshouser 18
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Orange County," shows that for every one dollar the County spends on services, Orange County
realizes $0.76 from the residential sector and $4.21 from the commerciaUindustrial sector. This
study assumed that public services would be offered by Orange County. In the case of Buckhorn
Village, services will be provided by Mebane; therefore, increasing the return to Orange County
beyond the $4.21 stated. The study went on to show that agricultural land generates $1.38 for
each service dollar. Quoting from that study, "These fmdings for Orange County are consistent
with the fmdings of nearly every Cost of Community Services study that has been carried out in
other communities throughout the U.S. The degree of cross-subsidization of the residential sector
- in particular, the extent to which the Orange County's commercial sector pays for services
provided to its residential sector - is somewhat higher than the median in other studies that have
been conducted nationally. Closer to home, the relative balance of revenues and expenditures
across land use categories lies between what was found in comparable studies conducted in
Chatham and Wake Counties." The report, and this study's consulting team, recognizes the
importance of a diversity of land uses and the interconnection between living, working, and
playing in a community. At the same time, a development that fueled residential development
would bring additional costs that should be analyzed and evaluated.
This study's research shows that there will be a minor impact on Orange County schools.
What impact is felt will be related to the 200 multi-family residential units planned for the
development. Some portion of the new housing units may be occupied by newcomers with
school-aged children; however the impact will be small relative to the size of the development.
Unlike in other areas where water and wastewater open significant land for residential
development, the extension of infrastructure from Mebane will open land in the economic
development zone, to be used for commercial and industrial development.
Sanford Holshouser 19
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
The Buckhorn Village project is unlike industrial development projects that fuel
residential growth. The wages offered in retail and accommodation and food service businesses
are not "relocation" wages. It is unlikely that people will move to Orange County for jobs other
than key management positions. However, people that live in Orange County and drive to work
in other counties for retail jobs will fmd this as an opportunity to live and work in the same area,
reducing miles traveled. If any relocation is driven by this project, Alamance County is a more
cost effective choice given that the median home value is $116,907 in Alamance County and
$216,958 in Orange County based on Census data and projections. Orange County staff has
information from Market Opportunity Research Enterprises, a market research and analysis firm,
which show new and resale averages to be $329,006.
Benefits of Opening New Economic Development Zoned Land
One key long-term economic development advantage to Buckhorn Village is that it will
bring infrastructure close to a 600-acre economic development zoned area and the 200-acre area
with industrial land use. Orange County's land use plan, which dates to 1981, has designated this
area for economic, commercial, and industrial development. An indirect benefit of the Buckhorn
Village is that it will allow further implementation of the County's land use plan. Given the
information above on the cross-subsidization of public services, Orange County should look for
areas of implementation in the land use plan to provide employments centers for a variety of
economic sectors; office, retail, services, light industrial. Creating employment centers in the
County will reduce commuting, transportation strains, environmental impact, and create a
sustainable development.
Sanford Holshouser 20
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Spin-Off Businesses
Each economic development project creates spin-off development. During the
construction phase, sub-contractors of all types will be needed, as will sign companies, pavers,
landscapers, etc. There will be ongoing spin-off through contracted services. In the case of
Suckhorn Village, Orange County landscaping contractors will have opportunities to bid on new
business. Some establishments may outsource security, maintenance, and other services.
Creating new opportunities for small and entrepreneurial businesses is an important aspect to
economic development and is inherent to projects of this size and nature.
Environmental Impact
This study did not include a full environmental impact review. However, the consulting
team did research whether any environmental permits were required. Other than standard
development permits such as storm water run-off and construction permits, the project will
require no special air or water quality permits beyond adhering to `Neuse River Rules.'
Sanford Holshouser 21
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
Methodology
This report is submitted to Orange County as an expert analysis of the Buckhorn Village
project. Sanford Holshouser used public and private data sources, information from previous
studies, and interviews with Orange County staff to develop the findings in this report. Public
data sources include state and federal agency reports such as NC Department of Revenue
publications and the U.S. Census. The private data source used is ESRI, a recognized world
leader in geographic information system technology. ESRI data estimates and projections are
based on the 2000 U.S. Census. Information gathered from previous reports is cited in the
reference section. The Barnes study, which derived its data from interviews with East West
Partners, provided most of the project-specific data. The Orange County Assistant Manager and
Planner provided project information in two meetings with the consultant.
Direct impact conclusions were drawn from quantitative analysis of the data. Generally
accepted means of computing and comparing economic and demographic data were used. In
addition to direct impact conclusions drawn from data, professional opinions were rendered in
this study concerningrridirect impacts. The professional opinions contained herein are based on
Sanford Holshouser's partners' more than 120 years of direct economic development experience.
Our opinions are based on firsthand knowledge of developing property, local government
financing, permitting, labor force patterns, economic and demographic data, and analyzing
public services.
Based on the data sources utilized, and Sanford Holshouser's longtime direct economic
development experience, this report represents an expert level of review and analysis of the
Buckhorn Village project.
Sanford Holshouser 22
Orange County: Buclchorn Village
APPENDIX -Orange County Land Use Map of Development Area
Land ~Jse Element
of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan
t-~ ~\
~`
``/ Jt~
~ tl,•r • r lit
-~ iTt_-r.^_
m I
~, y ~,~
/
r~,
v 1--t
r,~- 1
I
13~ ,
I.
\G P
/ffi'
r
I _ ~ 1
l- ~
~~: ~ , ~ . I i / ~ P I ~ ~ l ~ ~ w ~~ r:
i
I ~.
~~ t,- ~ ~'1 11 ~,i ~ y; 3 L` dtir.;;,~~.1 ~ ;1J .iH
_ A \ 1 ) ~' ,r i i i Il' G legend:
~ ~ c ~ ~'"(~' 'v -~ ~' -~}~ Q to year bare bon
t ' ,~ rye Q:V year trans bon
~, J° ~ l "'f ~'- ~ ~ ~~r. •~ ~~~~ QRural Resrtlenbal
~ \. 11 r 1 I ~ n• ~~ _ ~RUml eutlOr
f
~ Q nctilitsnl Ro;rdpnbal
I~ ` Ilil ~_1 Ott ~li~ ~ ~ r d~ ~~~~"~ /.,~ a :ourEeProiEdwnPreos
I lAUn nPai E+lra TEmtOnal Junsdclron
I~~ t~-~ ~ s ~ I ~~Y ~~~ ~:1~ ~,~~ ~lAUmaPN Tm+nl mts
;. ~ ~f ~ ~" ~ ~- ~ i -.-; 1 - QFUarc ln:nro:; rroo:
y ~ f-~ f ~11rJ,.~' / ~(/`} ~{/~ ~ ~ ••s, hlor St.PGY Wotorhta:
~c~}~~ --r ~--J '_11l V4rr'/f~/'~ Iii//~ `~(( ~,~' WS'ursnnd CnCCOI Picas
l~f,~~... "" I I„' 1 7f ~ f~ r AuvAV NOdn:
~ fI- ~ 4 Ir _J~ ~ ~. f~~ vt=~. l!'~l~j-~ ~RUml Communty l7otle
~j _ ~ ~ C~ I `L- ~r,~ , ,/ r J ~ , QRUmI Nnr~l'boihmtl(JOde
~T1 ~1 I ''(jlifj 1%iz ~~ Rural lnm,:mmb,eae
~ L,=~1^ _;~ ~ t i ~ ~ ~ •., i_! ~/./r con•mora~ulodo
~~ ~ <rl ``1~~, N~~ fJE ~s~~ pCOmmer~auVlnou9n~MOC1+
T ~r 1
.`-~i ~} ~ ~ _ J ;t7~ ° ! ~.I 'i `~ ` r~ I IEcenomn(MveloPment
~~-~t_ ~-1, ' ~ t'~~ ~ r r}'~ ~P !``_ ~ 1 !p~;~!r~I!' Macw.a~ormRmnn:,~nran
`J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t i I (~ e"jj ~ 1 ~c%~~e r
/ ~ ,
~a a- n t , Mlies
-~ l LJ ~ ~~- ~- o~ ~ ~'~~ ~ - ~ I 1 inch equals 1 miles
9
I 7~ I ~ ~ G ~Cy l~ } tran:e CnuttVPl.nrrtp eN ln5eE11mfbWRntrt
l J ~~ ~ T l~l [~ 1. ~- 1 I~{ ~ GSNm Prv?CW EnvaCx:m Ttl3 top/mrlN M>/Ot,;tpP
p 1 ! YI ~ 1 ~ t ~ ~' 1111 ~I -~ ;;me (` ttu my t+e vnm'<n •!nv r: rehrtnte Ul2ttry
~_ fe? Y i ~. l ~~y~~~ w". .<trru~msr:,rst~~:Y/.m>•,~~
_ _.~. ~I ~ ~ \.-~--
~YT L~- , ~ \ [(~,,,(('' ~-~ I ~- VKAn(bYr ilbmCDt(4N 9ak mlf~E llMl1
1 ~~i~ y_~ J f ,~~P'~ ORV~IIO'.trPY[14Y11nN
Sanford Holshouser 23
Orange County: Buckhorn Village
References
Barnes, Zakia, Economic Impact of Buckhorn Village, Orange County, NC, University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2008.
Buckhorn Road Associates, LLC, Orange County Tax Value Analysis, 2008.
ESRI, Business Analyst Online, www.bao.esri.com.
N.C. Department of Revenue, State Sales and Use Tax Reports.by Fiscal Year,
http://www.dor.state.nc.us/publications/fiscalyearsales.html, 2005-06 and 2006-07.
N.C. Employment Security Commission, Labor Market Information,
http://www.ncesc.com/1mi/default.asp?init=true, 2006 and 2007 Third-Quarter.
N.C. Office of State Budget and Management, State Data Center, 2006 Certified Population
Estimates, http://www.osbm.state.nc.us/ncosbm/facts and figures/state data center.shtm, 2006.
Renkow, Mitch, The Cost of Community Services in Orange County, Department of Agricultural
and Resource Economics, NC State University, 2006.
U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, www.census.gov.
Sanford Holshouser 24
%~ ~> :y~
~ f~~~n ~~,i.
The Sanford 'ea].shaiuser
8usiness'~evelopmen~ Group.
THE S,ANF®RD HOI.SH®USER B~.7SIlOTE~S
DEVEL®1'MEleTT Gl2®UI', I..I.C
The Sanford Holshouser Business Development Group is an innovative and
growing economic development consulting firm that provides action planning,
site selection services, and unique strategies to communities, organizations,
and companies worldwide..Affiliated with the law firm Sanford Holshouser,
LLP, our firm proudly continues the legacy of integrity and leadership and
furthers the visionary economic development ideas of the firm's founders,
former US Senator and NC Governor Terry Sanford and former NC Governor
Jirn Holshouser.
Sanford Holshouser's six partners' direct economic development experience includes:
~~~ marketing and business recruitment
~~ existing industry retention and expansion
~~ site selection
small business development
~~ infrastructure development
workforce development
industrial, business, and research park development
shell building development
site certification
%+~ utility related economic development programs
~}~ entrepreneurial initiatives
~ structurin.g economic development organizations
operational strategies for EDOs
rs incentive negotiations
~~~ incentive policy development
and a range of other economic development strategies
THE SAiVFORD HOLSHOUSER SUSIIVESS DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC
PO Box 5646 Carp, NC 27512-5646
919-755-1800 www.sanfordholshouser.com
~:~.
~ .. ~ S~ t ' ~~. I
. ;::ti,:_
The~Sa`n~Ord NalshapSer
Busipess,sDevelopraent,,~Group
Sanford Holshouser Setvrces
Site Selection
~$ Selection Criteria -assist companies in developing location importance factors.
~~-,- Search -comprehensive search for sites and/or buildings that meet client needs.
Comparisons - develop a standardized cost/benefit comparison of communities.
*~'- Incentive Negotiating -negotiate fair, reasonable incentives for a long term partnership
between the company and community.
Operations and Management
w Strategic Planning -action planning that provides unique solutions to communities with a
focus on sustainability and implementation.
Board Development -assist ED boards in building leadership roles; retreat facilitation.
Executive Search -recruit the qualified professional for pour program; negotiate the
contract.
'~ Bridge Management -professional management of the economic development program
during the executive search.
~~ Private Sector Partnerships -assess the current organization and program and capitalize on
partnerships with the local private sector.
~= Fundraising -through association with one of the nation's best professional economic
development fundraising groups.
Program Development
~~ Local Program Development -assist communities in broadening their ED program by
developing strategies for Business Retention and Expansion, Workforce Development,
Small Business Assistance, Entrepreneurship and Agribusiness.
Marketing -through association with the nation's leading lead generation firm, qualify leads,
reaching the decision makers who are managing active projects; target-market analysis to
enable the recruitment of companies that are compatible with the community.
Client Handling -ensuring prospects are provided professional treatment.
Product Development
~:- Product Development -industrial/business/technology park development; shell building
programs; consortium financing; site certification/qualification; brokerage; land banking;
product development deal structuring; multi-jurisdictional industrial parks.
Incentives and Financrng
~ri Incentives Negotiations -ensure the deal is right for the community.
~~ Incentive Policies -assist communities in developing policies that protect investment.
~- Financing -strategies for financing product development and program operation.
THE SANFORD HOLSHOUSER BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC
PO Box 5646 Cary, NC 27512-5646
919-755-1800 www.sanfordholshouser.com
~` ~ w~~
~:
The Sanford Halsbouser
Busl:ness. iDevelopman~, Group
Sanford Holshouser Partners
• Governor Holshouser participates in the Business Development Group's consulting
projects involving economic development policy.
• Ernie Pearson is North Carolina's leading expert on incentives, incentive policies and
structuring product development initiatives and nonprofit economic development activities.
• Bob Comer has specific experience restructuring economic development organizations.
• Crystal Morphis specializes in existing business, product development and comprehensive
economic development planning.
• Rocky Lane's specialties include workforce development, training and existing business
retention and expansion.
• Mike Geouge has extensive experience in city planni~ig and electric utility related economic
development issues.
• Bob De Mauri has more than thirty-five yeaxs of experience in economic and community
development at the local, regional, and state levels.
Governor James E. Holshouser, Jr. has been involved in public service throughout his career as a
lawyer dedicated to his clientele, a state representative, Governor from 1973 to 1977, and by service
in numerous public and private sector boards, such as the UNC Board of Governors. During his
tenure as Governor, North Carolina saw a number of economic development "firsts", to include the
first North Carolina overseas recruitment office in Germany and the first time this state had total
new investment to surpass one billion do]lars. He has guided and participated in policy matters
related to economic development initiatives from local to the state level.
Ernest C. Pearson has served both in the private practice of law and in public policy positions. He
served as Assistant Secretary for Economic Development of the NC Department of Commerce. He
managed economic development programs, including industrial recruitment, international trade,
small business development, tourism, film industry recruitment, and finance programs for industry.
Since returning to the private sector in 1993, his law practice has focused on economic development
matters, representing numerous local jurisdictions in economic development projects and companies
in site selection projects.
Robert F. Comer has developed strategic action plans, organizational restructufing and
privatization, marketing plans, personnel policies and funding campaigns for several local and
regional economic development organizations in North Carolina. A local developer for 15 pears and
a pioneer in regional economic development, Bob most recently was chairman of Piedmont Triad's
regional economic development Foundation. A retired US Navy Captain, Bob graduated from
UNC-Chapel Hill and has a Master Degree equivalent from the US Naval War College.
THE SAIVFORD HOLSHOUSER BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC
PO Box 5646 Carp, NC 27512-5646
919-755-1800 www.sanfordholshouser.com
~y a,
rv . ~~~ T
~8us~nessfDevelopmen~ Group
Crystal P. Morphis, CEcD, has over 10 pears of direct economic development experience. She has
experience in developing industrial parks, site certification, marketing, existing industry program
development, strategic planning, private sector fundraising, executive searches and research for
economic development. She serves on the Advisory Board for NC State University's Industrial
Extension Service and is an instructor at the UNC-Chapel Hill Basic ED Course. Crystal holds a
Bachelor of Arts in Economics from Salem College and a Master of Science in Economics from
UNC-Charlotte.
L. Calvin "Rocky" Lane, Jr., has over 13 years experience as an economic developer and 15 pears
in workforce development. During that tenure, he was responsible for developing a fully serviced
industrial park, a shell building, two NCDOC Certified Sites, an award wv~ning marketing program,
and the successful recruitment of 17 new companies and numerous expansions representing over
$1.5 billion in new investment and over 2000 new jobs. Rocky served in various positions with
Halifax Community College for over 13 years, the last three as Dean of Continuing Education. He
holds Bachelor and Master Degrees from N.C. State University.
Michael K. Geouge, CEeD, has over 37-years of economic development and city planning
experience. He has been the Manager of Economic Development for Duke Power/ Nantahala
Power, manager of the western regional office of the North Carolina Department of Commerce and
spent 15-pears experience as a city planner and/or planning director with the states of North
Carolina, Tennessee and Mississippi. He has participated in over 300 industrial client visits and in
nearly 100 industrial client announced locations. He earned a Bachelor of Science in urban
geography from East Tennessee State University.
Robert S. De Mauri, AICP, has more than thirty-five years of experience in economic and
community development. He has held positions with local and state governments as well as in the
private sector and was Director of the Thomas Jefferson Partnership for Economic Development in
the Charlottesville, Virginia region. His experience includes preparing economic development
strategies, marketing plans and local land use plans and ordinances. He has also worked with
companies to provide site location assistance while evaluating the competitive advantages of
communities. He earned a Bachelor in City Planning from the University of Virginia.
THE SANFORD HOLSHOUSER BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC
PO Box 5646 Cary, NC 27512-5646
919-755-1800 www.sanfordholshouser.com
~Y .~,~ ~
i~
~.; ~ ;
'fhe Sanford 'HalshGaBer
Business rDevelopaar+t Group
Current anal Previous EDC/Government Clients of
The Sanford Holshouser Business Development Group and Sanford Holshouser LLP
Advantage West Regional Partnership, NC
Albert Lea, MN
Alleghany County, NC
Anson County, NC
Ashe County, NC
Avery County, NC
Carteret County EDC, NC
Catawba County, NC
Chester County, SC
Chesterfield County, SC
On behalf of ElectriCities, Inc.
City of Albemarle, NC
City. of Chenyville, NC
City of Gastonia, NC
City of High Point, NC
City of Kinston, NC
City of Laurinburg, NC
City of Lexington, NC
City of Lumberton, NC
City of Monroe, NC
City of Morganton, NC
City of Newton, NC
City of Shelby, NC
City of Statesville, NC
Clay County, NC
Craven County, NC
Cumberland County, NC
Danville, VA
Davidson County, NC
Elizabeth City State University, NC
Gates County, NC
Halifax County, NC
Harnett County, NC
Henderson County Partnership, NC
Hertford County, NC
Hoke County EDC, NC
Hyde County, NC
Isedell County, NC
Jones County, NC
Kerr-Tar Regional Council. of Governments, NC
Lee County, NC
Martin County, NC
New Hanover County
North Carolina Department of Commerce
North Carolina's Eastern Region
North Carolina Motorsports Association
North Carolina Northeast Partnership
North Carolina's Southeast
Northampton County, NC
Pamlico County, NC
Pender County, NC
Piedmont Palmetto Economic Development
Alliance, SC
Research Triangle Regional Partnership, NC
Rockingham County Partnership fox Economic &
Tourism Development, NC
Rutherford County, NC
Salisbury-Rowan EDC, NC
Sampson County, NC
Stanly County, NC
Sung County, NC
On behalf of ElectriCities, Inc.
Town of Apex, NC
Town of Ayden, NC
Town of Benson, NC
Town of Clayton, NC
Town of Cornelius, NC
Town of Drexel, NC
Town of Fatmville, NC
Town of Huntexsville, NC
Town of Landis, NC
Town of Louisburg
Town of Maiden, NC
Town of Selma, NC
Town of Smithfield, NC
Town of Wake Forest, NC
Town of Granite Falls, NC
Town of Cary, NC
Town of Clinton, NC
Town of Fuquay-Varina, NC
Town of Ellcin, NC
Town of Holly Springs, NC
Town of Navassa, NC
Town of Red Springs, NC
NC Seafood Industrial Park Authority/Wanchese
Seafood Industrial Park, NC
Wayne County Development Alliance, NC
Washington County, NC
Yadkin County Chamber of Commerce, NC
Yancey County, NC
Yancey County EDC, NC
York County, SC
THE SANFORD HOLSHOUSER BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC
PO Box 5646 Cary, NC 27512-5646
919-755-1$00 www.sanfordholshouser.com
Er ~{. 1~ ~ ~~7
(,;
The; Sanfi~rt- Ha].shous.er
Business tfeveiopment_6roup
.x'":89.;:. <rM C?:~ s~~€u?~.
The Sanford Holshouser Business Development Group and Sanford Holshouser, LLP, have
been involved in some or all of the site selection process for the following companies.
3C Alliance LLP -Battery manufacturer Qapanese/Ge an/US joint venture)
3 Tex, Inc. -Composite materials manufacturer
Ann's House of Nuts, Inc. -Snack processing and packaging
Anpota Development Inc. - Concrete manufacturer (Jamaican)
Applied Distribution Resources, Inc. -Distribution
Biosignia, Inc. -Serum marker analysis
Biotron Waste Research, Ltd. -Waste recycling (Canada)
Blueberry Plastic Mill Corp. -Plastics recycling
Citterio USA, Inc. -Specialty meat processing and packaging (Italian)
Corrugated Container Corporation -Corrugated container manufacturer
Cott Beverages USA, Inc. -Beverage bottler (Canadian)
Cranberry Clouds Ltd. -Furniture manufacturer (England)
Dudson USA, Inc. -Distribution of institutional china (England)
Duracell Battery, Inc. -Joint venture partner in 3C Alliance
Environ Products -Rotational molding manufacturer and headquarters
EnviroTire Recycling Technologies LLC -Tire recycling (Canada)
Formscape LLC -Electronic form systems (England)
Gailey & Lord -Textile fiber manufacturer
GoGo Motorsports USA, LLC -Scooter assembly/distribution (China)
Hickory-White Furniture Company -Furniture manufacturer
Intercord Technische Faden, GmbH -Industrial/tire cord manufacturers (Germany/Turkey joint venture)
Kordsa, Inc. -Industrial/Tire manufacturer (Germany/Turkey joint venture)
Just Care, Inc. -Private prison hospital facility
Liberty Hardware Manufacturing Corporation -Distribution of hardware for fiimiture manufacturers
Logic Marine Corporation -Boat manufacturer (Lndonesia)
Magma Entertainment Corp -Animal bedding manufacturer
Matisse Derivan (USA) Inc. -.Artist paint manufacturer (Australia)
Meadows Metalcraft LLC -Lamp manufacture (Dubai)
Miza Pharmaceuticals, Inc. -Pharmaceutical packager (Canada)
Norske Skog Industries ASA -Flooring manufacture (Norway)
North Carolina Quadel Consulting Corporation -Data processing
Novo Nordisk Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. -Production facility
Parton Family -Theater and entertainment district
Rerycling Earth Products, Inc. -Recycling building materials
Royal Laser Technologies, Inc. -Component manufacturer
Rutherford Motorsports, LLC -Motor scooter/rycle distribution
Sherrill Furniture Company -Furniture manufacturer
Spectronic Plating -Plating components for computers (Canada)
Tensor Machinery -Furniture component manufacture (Canada)
Texel, Inc. -Non woven fabrics manufacture (Canada)
Toshiba Battery, Inc. -Joint venture partner in 3C Alliance Qapan)
Varta Batterie AC -Joint venture partner in 3C .Alliance (German)
THE SANFORD HOLSHOUSER BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC
PO Box 5646 Cary, NC 27512-5646
919-755-1800 www.sanfordholshouser.com