A site selector working a 30-property long list does not call back for missing studies. The site gets set aside. Lindsey Cannon of Quest Site Solutions described the pattern in August 2026: a site that is difficult to evaluate "may never receive a serious evaluation at all." Bradley Migdal of Cushman & Wakefield said it more directly in 2025: due diligence too often reveals that "half the sites in play aren't viable," with incomplete environmental work and unconfirmed power among the recurring problems. The Site Selectors Guild's RFI Exchange guidance warns that missing information on key items may result in elimination.
I covered what this looks like from the city's side in Issue #4: a property "set aside for incompleteness rather than rejected on merit, which is a distinction with no practical difference to the city."
Money not spent on site studies shows up in the budget. Deals lost for want of documentation do not show up anywhere, because the city is never told it was screened out. This piece treats the studies as capital investments with verifiable costs, gives current ranges for parcels typical of tier-3 markets, and maps four state programs that offset those costs.
Who this is for
You direct economic development in a city or county with available industrial land. The parcel is 20 to 100 acres, greenfield or brownfield, with road access and some utility proximity. You believe the site is competitive. You may have informal confirmation from a utility that capacity exists, or from a local engineer that soils are buildable.
What you do not have: current, third-party documentation in the formats site selectors require. A Phase I environmental site assessment with a reliance letter. A geotechnical report with boring logs. A jurisdictional wetland delineation. A boundary survey. A utility capacity letter with a date and a signer.
What stands in the way is the budget request — justifying $50,000 to $150,000 in predevelopment spending to a city manager or finance director who will ask what the return is. This piece is written so you can forward it with the memo.
What the studies cost
The ranges below are planning benchmarks for 20–100 acre parcels in tier-3 markets, drawn from published engineering guidance, state program documentation, and public contracts from 2023–2026. No authoritative national dataset exists for these studies filtered to this parcel size. Use the ranges to scope a budget request, then get project-specific quotes.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment: $4,500–$7,000. A 2024 environmental-engineering cost guide places large-site Phase I work in this range; its 25-acre rural example cost approximately $6,500. Cost rises with industrial operating history, number of parcels, regulatory file volume, and supplemental lender or program requirements. A greenfield agricultural parcel with no prior industrial use falls near the low end. A former manufacturing site with multiple owners and state regulatory files approaches or exceeds the high end.
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment: $7,000–$60,000. Maryland's brownfield program (accessed August 2026) publishes this range, tied to property size and the extent of environmental issues identified in the Phase I. A Phase II is triggered by Phase I findings — recognized environmental conditions that require investigation — so acreage alone cannot predict scope. Primary cost drivers: number and depth of soil borings, whether groundwater monitoring wells are required, contaminant panels specified, and whether the work is limited to presence/absence testing or extends to horizontal and vertical delineation of contamination. Significant legacy contamination can exceed $60,000. Plenty of sites never need a Phase II, but the way a site selector learns that is by reading a current Phase I.
Geotechnical Investigation: $30,000–$50,000. Two current public contracts establish this range. Neville Township, PA (February 2024) contracted geotechnical study work at $29,894. Chehalis, WA (2024) budgeted $49,740 for an industrial-site-readiness geotechnical report. Cost depends on the number, placement, and depth of borings; rock coring requirements; karst, fill, or expansive-soil conditions; and whether the report is preliminary site characterization or foundation-design level. First-cut screening requires the former.
Wetland Delineation: $7,000–$29,000. Published guidance (2026) places routine delineations on parcels over 20 acres at $7,000–$15,000. A Chehalis industrial-site scope (2024) that included Corps coordination reached approximately $29,000. Cost varies with vegetation and soil complexity, number of wetland systems, wooded or inaccessible terrain, season of fieldwork, and whether the scope includes a preliminary jurisdictional determination or only field delineation.
ALTA/NSPS Boundary Survey: $8,000–$15,000+. Published engineering-firm guidance (2026) places a 20-acre industrial ALTA survey in this range. Cost is driven by perimeter length and shape, number of parcels, quality of existing monuments and prior surveys, title exceptions and easements, requested Table A optional items, and whether topographic mapping is included. Larger or multi-parcel properties with complex title histories require project-specific quotes.
Traffic Impact Study: $20,000–$35,000. A Washington court record (2024) reported $22,000 for a traffic study. A 2023–2024 municipal engineering agreement priced a limited traffic impact technical memorandum at $34,653 and noted that a full traffic impact study was not included. Cost depends on the number of intersections, traffic count requirements, analysis horizon, state DOT involvement, and review cycles.
Electric Load / Utility Capacity Study: $5,000–$36,500 (1–25 MW). Snohomish PUD (accessed August 2026) charges $5,000 for its large-load study process. Pedernales Electric Cooperative (accessed August 2026) lists a $1,500 application fee plus $20,000 system study and $15,000 facility study for nonstandard loads between 5 MW and 25 MW. Above 25 MW the fees escalate sharply: AEP Ohio (accessed August 2026) charges $10,000 for 25–50 MW, $50,000 for 50–100 MW, and $100,000 above 100 MW. These are study fees only. They do not include the cost of any resulting line, feeder, or substation construction. I covered the structure of utility capacity answers in Issue #2.
Full documentation package
For a 40-acre greenfield parcel with no environmental history, moderate topography, and a 5–15 MW power requirement, the full study package sums to roughly $80,000–$160,000. A brownfield site with Phase II triggers, complex wetlands, and a larger power ask can reach $200,000–$300,000.
The package assumes Phase I ESA, boundary survey, geotechnical investigation, wetland delineation, utility capacity study, and traffic impact analysis, with no Phase II triggered. Virginia's accelerated-characterization program caps a comprehensive Tier 3 due-diligence package at $500,000, which sets the upper boundary for a state-defined full scope.
Four state programs that offset these costs
FAST NY and VBRSP fund the studies directly. Select Tennessee funds them through a companion grant. SiteOhio certifies sites but leaves study costs with the applicant. That distinction is the first thing to establish in a budget request, because it determines whether the ask is for the full amount or for a match.
FAST NY (New York)
FAST NY operates three tracks. Track A is a no-cost certification designation for sites with completed studies. Track B is the documentation-funding mechanism: working-capital grants of up to $500,000 per site (up to $1 million for qualifying large-acreage or large-power sites) for planning and studies needed to achieve certification. Eligible costs include environmental assessment, surveying, test borings, compaction tests, engineering, and design for water, sewer, electric, gas, and road improvements. Track C provides capital grants for infrastructure at sites that have substantially completed certification.
Track B funds are issued on a reimbursement basis. No fixed percentage match is published, but leveraged local and private investment is a scoring criterion. Applications carry a $250 fee and a 1% commitment fee on the award. Intake is rolling through the state's Consolidated Funding Application portal, after an approved intent-to-apply submission.
New York's FY2026 budget added $100 million, bringing total program authority to $400 million. No sunset or pending reauthorization was identified in current program materials.
A separate companion program, POWER UP, provides up to $300 million ($100 million appropriated in FY2026) specifically for proactive electric-infrastructure development at industrial sites. POWER UP supplements FAST NY; it does not replace it.
Virginia Business Ready Sites Program (VBRSP)
VBRSP characterizes sites from Tier 1 through Tier 5. Funding is competitive and discretionary, with priority given to advancing lower-tier sites toward Tier 4 or Tier 5.
The relevant funding mechanism for documentation is the accelerated characterization track: up to $500,000 for the studies and due diligence required for Tier 3, including Phase I and II environmental assessments, wetland determination, geotechnical borings, ALTA-preferred boundary and topographic surveys, traffic analysis, preliminary engineering, utility routing, and power studies. The broader site-development grant has no published universal per-site cap and can fund infrastructure, acquisition, and construction.
Match requirements for publicly controlled sites: the state-to-local ratio is 1:1 in nondistressed localities, 2:1 in distressed localities, and 3:1 in double-distressed localities. Expressed as local share of total project cost, that is 50%, 33%, or 25%, respectively. Cash and documented in-kind contributions qualify, including site acquisition, prior due diligence, and staff time within the preceding five years.
One award per site per fiscal year. Virginia's enacted 2026–2028 budget provides $30 million for FY2027 and $20 million for FY2028. In FY2025, applications requested $262 million against $40 million available, a 6.5:1 oversubscription ratio. The program is established in Virginia statute. No sunset or pending reauthorization was identified in the reviewed 2025–2026 records.
SiteOhio (Ohio)
SiteOhio provides free site evaluation, site-selector education, and applicant training. If a site achieves authentication, the only program fee is $500 to the Ohio Department of Development.
The program does not reimburse or fund the required engineering studies. The applicant community or site owner bears those costs. Certification requires at least 30 contiguous developable acres, completed Phase I/II and geotechnical work, wetland delineation, cultural and endangered-species studies, and agency concurrence. Authentication lasts three years; recertification is $50. No sunset or pending reauthorization was identified in current program materials or Ohio statute.
Other Ohio programs can finance site work separately. JobsOhio announced a $2 million Ohio Site Inventory Program grant for a speculative building on an already authenticated site in March 2026, but those awards are administratively separate from the certification program.
Select Tennessee
Tennessee's certified-sites program pairs evaluation and Austin Consulting certification with a reimbursable Site Development Grant that can fund pre-certification due diligence. Stand-alone due-diligence grants are capped at $100,000. The overall Site Development Grant ceiling is $5 million.
State/community funding splits vary by county economic tier: 50/50 for Tier 1, 70/30 for Tier 2, 90/10 for Tier 3, 95/5 for Tier 4. (Tennessee's tier system ranks counties by economic distress; higher tiers receive more state support.) TNECD states that the community match rate is reduced by 50% after an Austin Consulting site visit, though the program page does not illustrate the calculation. Confirm exact terms in the application package.
The program is competitive with annual rounds. The 2027 round requires an October 15, 2026 letter of intent, November 19 application, January 2027 presentations, and February announcements. In February 2026, TNECD awarded more than $13 million to 13 sites, including due-diligence awards of $60,075 and $100,000. The program continues under the Rural Economic Opportunity Act. No sunset or pending reauthorization was identified in current program materials.
Program comparison
| Studies funded? | Documentation ceiling | Match | Intake | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAST NY | Track B reimburses eligible studies | $500K ($1M for qualifying sites) | No fixed %; leveraged investment scored | Rolling |
| VBRSP | Accelerated characterization and development grants | $500K for characterization; no universal cap for development | Local share: 50%, 33%, or 25% of total by distress status | Competitive annual cycle |
| SiteOhio | No — applicant pays | N/A | $500 authentication fee | Ongoing |
| Select Tennessee | Companion grant reimburses due diligence | $100K for due diligence | 50/50 to 95/5 by county tier | Competitive annual rounds |
Sequencing for constrained budgets
If you cannot fund the full package in one cycle, sequence by what site selectors screen earliest and what constrains the most project types.
Phase I ESA first. Nearly every certification program requires it and nearly every site selector expects it. At $4,500–$7,000 it is the least expensive study on this list, and incomplete or missing environmental documentation is among the most frequently cited reasons a site cannot survive a basic RFI. If the Phase I turns up recognized environmental conditions, you learn early whether a Phase II is needed and roughly what it will cost, before you have committed to the rest of the package.
Boundary survey second. Buildable acreage, setbacks, easements, utility routing: none of these can be described without a current ALTA/NSPS survey. Every subsequent study references it as the base document. Geotech boring placement, wetland mapping, and preliminary engineering all use the same coordinate system and legal description, so running the survey early means the studies that follow start from a common spatial reference rather than three different ones.
Utility capacity confirmation third. Power availability is increasingly the binding constraint for advanced manufacturing, data-intensive operations, and electrified process heat. A $5,000–$36,500 study tells you whether the site can serve the project families you are targeting, or whether serving them requires infrastructure investment that changes the budget by an order of magnitude. I worked through how those capacity answers get assembled in Issue #5.
Geotechnical and wetland delineation fourth. These define the buildable footprint within the surveyed boundary. A site with 60 surveyed acres but 15 acres of jurisdictional wetlands and 10 acres of unsuitable soils is a 35-acre site. Knowing that before you respond to an RFI requesting 50 acres of pad-ready land saves you from a screening failure that carries into the next search.
Traffic impact study last in most cases. Traffic analysis is project-specific. Trip generation depends on the use, shift patterns, and workforce size, and most site selectors do not require it at first cut. Fund it when you have a specific prospect, or when road access is the obvious question a selector will ask. A site on a two-lane road with no turning infrastructure moves this study up the list.
The budget memo
Documenting a 40-acre greenfield industrial site to first-cut screening standard costs roughly $80,000–$160,000. In states with documentation-funding programs, a substantial share of that may be reimbursable: up to 100% under FAST NY's Track B, 50%–75% of the state award under VBRSP depending on distress status, or up to $100,000 through Select Tennessee's due-diligence grant. SiteOhio certifies sites but does not fund the required studies.
A Phase I ESA has a useful life of roughly 12 months under ASTM standards before it requires updating. A boundary survey remains valid until a title event changes the property. Geotechnical and wetland reports carry varying shelf lives depending on site activity and regulatory requirements. These are depreciating assets, which means they belong in a maintenance line rather than a one-time appropriation.
Every search your site enters without current studies is a search where the site is sorted on completeness of documentation rather than on the attributes that would make it competitive. The studies are what it costs to be evaluated at all. That cost is known and quotable; the cost of the searches you never knew you were in is not.
- Phase I shelf life: Virginia's VBRSP accepts a Phase I ESA completed within five years for site characterization, while ASTM E1527-21 limits transaction reliance to 180 days with a one-year information window — a distinction that determines whether your completed report needs updating before a buyer can rely on it.
- Power readiness as separate investment: New York's $300 million POWER UP program treats electric infrastructure as a distinct capital layer beyond general site certification, with its first four awards totaling more than $38.9 million announced in April 2026.
- SiteOhio's three-year clock: Authentication expires after three years and recertification requires updated site information and confirmation that the property still meets program standards, which means utility headroom, environmental conditions, and land control can all change within a certification cycle.
- Tennessee's 2027 round deadline: The Select Tennessee Site Development Grant's next competitive round requires an October 15, 2026 letter of intent, with due-diligence grants of up to $100,000 available for sites that have completed a program site visit.