OCR Text |
Show ; Industrial Development Continues To Increase , By ROSELYN KIRK Irji Industrial Development in Davis County continues to expand west of 1-15, as evidenced by the announcement of Cen- " ' terville to contract for design plans for an industrial park and by North Salt Lake's action in giving preliminary approval to the second plat of the North Salt Lake In- V.,( dustrial Park. 9L THIS INDUSTRIAL expansion, in addi-tion addi-tion to other growth factors in the county, is the object of a study prepared by the Davis County Planning Commission for the Weber River Water Quality Planning 0. ( Council. This study analyzes potential growth in the county through 1995. (y The study deals with potentials for growth and projects alternatives for handling this growth. According to Robert Scott, Davis County Planner, who presented the study, the county will '5 1 increase in population from 126,000 in 1975 to 156,000 in 1980. Planners estimate that Dale the population in 1995 will rise to 227,800. I THE REPORT says the growth of Davis ' County's economy is indicated by increases in both the gross sales of the county and its labor force. During the five year period of 1971-1976, gross sales in the VirJ county doubled. The gross sales increased by 113 percent from $143,712,716 to 7j $305,617,239. The gross sales in the state of ' I'tah increased 96 percent during the same period. 101 The report also shows that the location of employment has shifted during the )V6 same period. In 1972, 72 percent of all the employment in Davis County was located ,vt north of Farmington. By 1975 only 67 percent of the workers were in North Davis. 2! MR. SCOTT pointed out that employment distribution indicates that 52 percent of the workers in the county are employed in the Clearfield-South Weber area in fields of manufacturing, transportation trans-portation and government. Bountiful is the second largest area of 92! employment in the county, but the 5,302 workers in this area are employed mostly 3j in construction, trade and finance. Service Ser-vice is the largest industry in South Davis. aij THE REPORT predicts, that by 1995, ap 93,523 people will be employed in the labor force in Davis County. In order to cope with the population projections, communities in the county . have been encouraged by the Davis County planners to upgrade their master plans. In most cases the cities have been given professional assistance from the planners' office. MANY OF these master plans are nearing completion, although few have been officially adopted. According to the fi report, "Cities in Davis County are I J becoming aware of the problems relating X to water pollution, storm drainage and llll land use as well as the need for better data upon which to base their decisions. In planning for industrial development, cities must take into consideration statis--i tics which show that industrial acreage will rise from 1,627 in 1980 to 2,285 in 1995. Earl King, director of Industrial Resources in Davis County, says that industrial in-dustrial development is needed to raise the taxes to educate the children in the community and to provide jobs. "IT COSTS $1,000 per pupil to educate children in the county," he said. The average property owner pays an average of $450 per year property taxes. He pointed point-ed out this is half of the cost needed to pj educate one child per year, "For this reason we must turn to industry which pays taxes and doesn't produce children to be educated." Mr. King feels it is essential to provide jobs for youth in the community, since "we want to provide for our own. If jobs are provided in Davis County, these young people will find jobs, stay in Davis County and contribute as taxpayers." MR. KING said one problem that plagues industrial development in the county is getting the utilities to the area west of 1-15 where most of the industrial development is planned. When 1-15 was built, the county did not have the cooperation of the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), he said. A metal pipe, which could provide the encasement to carry utilities under the freeway to the industrial developments which are planned on the other side, was not provided for in the building project. In order to provide utilities on the other side, cities now have to bore underneath the freeway for lines to the other side. This problem exists in the area from Kaysville south to West Bountiful. ANOTHER problem that Mr. King sees in developing the industrial areas is providing fron.age roads so that the county will have access to some of the locked in areas near the freeway. Industrial Indus-trial areas in Davis County do not have access to industrial real estate as do the areas in Salt Lake County, he said. Water is available in the county if needed for industrial development. But Mr. King pointed out that acreage is the biggest factor in determining where an industrial park is feasible. 'There aren't many places left in the county where there are 200 acres of uncommitted land with access." IN ADDITION to the North Salt Lake Industrial Park, the Freeport Center and the planned Centerville Industrial Park, Mr. King suggested the potential for an industrial park in West Layton. "In Davis County people want industry west of the railroad and the freeway." The eastern areas of the county around Fruit Heights would be an excellent site for a research park, Mr. King said. "It is just as good for the area as a school or a church. Research parks are very common in the East. They contribute to the neighborhoods neigh-borhoods and provide jobs closer to where people live." IT WILL be a selling job, he admitted, to convince residents that certain kinds of industry should be located on the bench areas, but "it's not logical to think of that area as sacred." Mr. King says the heavy industry in Davis County is located in the right place below the railroad tracks. HE ARGUED that even. without any more industry, Davis County is not as poor as they tell us. Statistics available from the Utah Economic and Business Review show the total assessed evaluation of Davis County for 1976 at $243, 185,000 as compared to Weber County at $257,893,000. The report issued by the planning department reports that an overriding policy in the county has been that "growth should be encouraged and should occur in the cities." ALTHOUGH the report agreed with Mr. King's projection that all cities did have access to existing water supplies to handle 1995 population projections, it stated the cities did not have service line and storage facilities at present to handle the demands of the 1995 population. The report pointed out the need for each city to plan a capital improvements program to provide these services. |