ML042800044

Limestone County, Alabama Comprehensive Plan, 1983

ML042800044
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	07/31/1983
From:	Top of Alabama Regional Council of Govts
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, State of AL, Dept of Economic & Community Affairs
References
-RFPFR, HUD-B-82-DC-01-0001 ALA-TAC-083-12
Download: ML042800044 (191)

Text

--

I-.

r--

BlBLlOGl3APHlC DATA

1. Report No 2

1 SHEET July, 1983 ALA-TAC-083-12

4. Title and Subtitle I

3. Rrcipienl's Accession No Comprehensive Plan, Limestone County, Alabama 7 Author(s)

Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments 115 Washington St,, SE Huntsville, Alabama 35801 12 Sponsoring Organization Name and Address Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs Office of State Planning and Federal Programs Division 135 South Unian St.

Montgomery, AL 36130-5601

16. Abstracts 6

8 Performing Organization Rept 10 Prolecl/T'ask/Work Unit No Third 11 Contract/Grant No HUD-B-82-DC-01-0001 13 Type of Report 8 Period Covered Final 14 The Comprehensive Plan presents a development plan for Limestone County, covering a planning period of 1982-2000. This Plan includes plans for land use, community I

facilities, transportation, and a capital improvements program and capital improve-ments budget. Also included is a program f a r overall plan implementation, which emphasizes various avenues of cooperative endeavors to be undertaken by the munici-palities and county government. The Plan stresses several "growth corridors" in Limestone County where future urban growth should occur because public facilities, utilities, and transportation services can be most easily developed in these corridor areas.

I

7. Key Words and Document Analysis. 174. Descriptors i

I c 7c COSATI FieldIGroup 1 RAvailabihty Sratcment 1 19 Securily Class (This National Technical Informalion 2285 Royal Port Road springfield. Virginia 22151 Service I Report)

UNCLASSIFIED 22 Price UNCLASSIFIEC

Reproduction of this document in whole or in part by a user is permitted.

preparation of this report was financed in part through a commnnity development block grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended; administered by the Office of State Planning and Federal Programs, Office of the Governor.

The For Information Address:

Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments 115 Washington St., SE Huntsville, AL 35801 First Printing Printed in the United States of America Cover Designed by Anderson Carroll Unique Report Number: ALA-TAC-083-12 Source of Copies: Limestone County Commission Courthouse Annex Washington Street Athens, AL 35612 National Technical Information Service 2285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22151 Abstract:

The Comprehensive Plan presents a development plan for Limestone County, cover-ing a planning period of 1982-2000.

community facilities, transportation, and a capital improvements program and capital improvements budget.

plementation which emphasizes various avenues of cooperative endeavors to be undertaken by the municipalities and county government.

several "growth corridors" in Limestone County where future urban growth should occur because public facilities, utilities, and transportation services can be most easily developed in these corridor areas.

This Plan includes plans for land use, Also included is a program for overall plan im-The Plan stresses i

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Today's increasing population growth, the pace of urbanization and the resultant problems point to the critical need for comprehensive planning.

officials and citizens alike are becoming increasingly aware of the effects of haphazard development. They are concerned not only with technological and economic development, but also with trends in population growth and distribution, employment, land use development, environmental quality, housing, the provision of adequate public facilities and services and their implications for the future of Limestone County.

Local Metropolitan Huntsville, of which Limestone County is a part, is a rapidly urbanizing area. The Huntsville SMSA which comprises Madison, Marshall, and Limestone Counties has grown from 201,879 in 1960 to 308,593 in 1980. Accord-ing to recent population projections, the SMSA will contain over 500,000 per-sons by the year 2000.

The steady growth of the region's population and economy will result in the expenditure of millions of dollars over the next twenty-year period for housing, industrial expansion and construction, and for public services and facilities. Since investment in these facilities will have a far reaching im-pact on Limestone County's development, decisions for expenditures can best be guided by effectively related public policies and programs. Thus, the need for realistic county planning is becoming increasingly evident in Limestone County.

INTENT The Limestone County Comprehensive Plan has as its basic intent the estab-lishment of a long-range public policy which provides for the coordinated de-velopment of all elements of the county to create a satisfying and efficient en-vironment for its residents; and the development of short-range development activities designed to implement short-range objectives and development poli-cies.

The Comprehensive Plan must consider all aspects of county activity, pro-viding policies and guiding future decisions relative to countywide development and land use. Its recommendations bear directly upon the decision-making of public bodies within the county, coordinating public decisions of a wide variety of governmental boards or commissions so that decisions may be mutually rein-forcing.

The Plan is also intended for use by the private sector. Since the Plan is based upon citizen involvement, it reflects preferences on the part of 1

residents of Limestone County that should be respected and reinforced by the private business community.

The Plan is general in nature, and its policy recommendations concentrate The policies will provide a guide for deter-upon issues countywi.de in scope.

mining which uses are appropriate in which areas and when development should take place.

GOALS The planning process involves many different elements which include the establishment of goals and objectives followed by the formulation of, some means of achieving the desired goals.

cerned with the future of the county--its environment, its economy, and above all the welfare of its people.

plan provide the basic framework for the physical arrangement of land uses and The Limestone County planning program is con-The goals selected for the Limestone County the a

a a

a 0

0 social and economic development of the county.

The goals selected for the Limestone County plan includer Develop a strong, diversified economic base, and provide for the orderly distribution of employment opportunities throughout the county.

Protect and manage the diverse and valuable land, water, and air resources of the county for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.

Develop and maintain a harmoniously balanced ecological system for the county in the context of regional problems and solutions and develop methods that enable man to continue physical development of the county without detriment to the environment.

Provide all residents with opportunities for a wide range of econamic, social, educational, health, commercial, and recreational activities and facilities.

Provide safe and adequate housing f a r all county residents with an oppor-tunity for choice among alternative living environments.

Promote a safe, efficient, and functional transportation system to serve the needs of all citizens and to support all segments of the economic base in the movement of goods and people.

Coordinate future urban and agricultural development in order to provide a harmonious arrangement of activities for total development in the county.

Reserve prime agricultural and forest lands and promote proper and inten-sive cultivation of agricultural areas.

PROCESS The planning process, although varying from county to county, consists of several interrelated and continuing activities. The Comprehensive Plan is not 2

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

1 1

I I

I I

I I

1

I i I

1 I

1 1

1 1

1 1

I 1

1 I

I 1

I 1

simply a product of the Limestone County Commission. Many county citizens and all local governments within the county have been involved in the process; and the Plan is, in large part, a product of the advice, assistance, and comment of the people and governments of Limestone County.

The process of planning for countywide development, as employed in Lime-

%tone County, can be summarized in the following outline of major steps:

Phase I

1. Research and Analysis 2.

Problem Identification and Goal Formulation 3.

Development and Evaluation of Alternatives

4. Development and Refinement of Plan Proposal

5. Plan Adoption Phase I1

1. Implementation Activities

2. Other comprehensive Planning Activities 3.

Updating and Revision Citizens and local governments have been invol-:eci in the process of the major steps in Phase I, and it is the intent to rnaiT-tain opportunities for citizen participation and increased local goverinenzs involvement throughout Phase 11.

COMPONENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan for Limestone County, crzsented in the following sections, consists of five interrelated elements:

1.

2.

3.

4.

The Population and Economic Analyses prese-ts en analysis of age, sex, race, income, employment, education, and other 52-acteristics of the population essential to the development 05 f-xczio-al plans. Projections of the population and employment are also prest?-te3 to form a basis for future recommendations.

The Community Facilities Plan proposes a sysz-z 35 2ublic facilities for the county designed to provide a level of pCbi:c services and facilities appropriate to the existing and anticipated sizs ~ ? d composition of the population.

The Housing Element is prepared in accorsance -*-Lz?. the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 and the Housing and Cc-;;-.xity Development Act of 1974. The Housing work program analyzes the exiszing housing market in terms of condition, supply and demand. Ho7:sk; zolicies are developed which insure the provisions of an adequate sxs2ly of housing and a decent residential environment throughout the COU~~~:J.

The Major Thoroughfare Plan proposes a circularior. system for the movement of people and goods in Limestone County. It 15 2ased primarily on 3

proposals of the A l a b a m a Highway Department.

Additional recommendations f o r highway improvements are made by the Limestone County Board of Com-missioners and TARCOG.

Recommendations include improvements t o the l o c a l thoroughfares serving Limestone County designed primarily t o improve t r a f -

f i c flow and reduce t r a f f i c c o n f l i c t s and congestion.

5.

The Future Land U s e Plan i d e n t i f i e s the location and i t e n s i t y of f u t u r e county development.

P o l i c i e s are presented i n order t o provide s p e c i f i c criteria t o be applied i n evaluating proposed p r o j e c t s.

Accordingly, the Plan recognizes t h e broad s t r u c t u r e of t h e county and deals with p o l i c i e s, o b j e c t i v e s, and standards r a t h e r than t h e detailed static a l l o c a t i o n s of s p e c i f i c land uses.

The p o l i c i e s and objectives form the b a s i s f o r more s p e c i f i c county and municipal plans which can and should be prepared.

In order t o c r e a t e a more e f f e c t i v e, responsive county planning process i n Limestone County over t h e next s i x years, the r e p o r t c f f e r s a s e r i e s of recom-mendations.

These include:

1.

Techniaues f o r Improvins t h e Countv Planning Process a.

The establishment of a voluntary association of elected and appointed l o c a l o f f i c i a l s t o m e e t regularly t o recommend major county planning and c a p i t a l improvements programming decision.

An organization of t h i s nature would promote awareness of common county problems and improve communication among area o f f i c i a l s.

A Count17 Planning Commission could function i n t h i s capacity.

b.

The undertaking by such an association of a coordinated review and scheduling of c a p i t a l improvements p r o g r m s for major thoroughfares, s e w e r and water services, e t c.

Proper sche&Jling of these programs would guide t h e development process i n accor5ance with public objec-t i v e s.

c.

The establishment of a Limestone County Infornation Service t o provide a common base of f a c t u a l knowledge t o public and p r i v a t e investors and t o enable them t o evaluate t h e i r actions.

V i t a l i n f o m a t i o n which would be gathered and stored and disseminated periodically would include:

1) Trend information concerning p a s t and current data on the countys population, economy, and land development.

2 )

Program information concerning e x i s t i n g and programmed county public improvements and f e d e r a l and s t a t e a i d programs f o r county devel-opment including open space, transportation, and public f a c i l i t i e s.

d.

The revision and coordination every f i v e years of the County Comprehen-sive Plan.

4 I

I I

I I

I I

1 1

I I

I I

I I

I 1

1 I

I I

1 1

I 1

I I

8 1

I t

1 I

I I

I I

1 c

dwelling units in the county, approximately 2,351 units were considered substandard. By the year 2000, approximately 20,000 additional dwelling units will be required to house the county's population.

fore, establishes a set of policies to encourage sound housing develop-ment for people of every age, sex, race, income level and origin.

The Plan, there-

5.

The Comprehensive Plan proposes the development of a coordinated transpor-tation system, including arterials, collectors, and local roads. Alabama Highway 53 should be four-laned from Huntsville to Ardmore, and the four-laning of the U S. 72 bridge over the Elk River should be completed. Policy guidelines are presented to provide adequate circulation means for people and goods in relation to present and future land use patterns.

6.

The Comprehensive Plan encourages greater variety and flexibility in resi-dential development. It encourages a diversity of life styles through a variety of dwelling types and their integration with well planned open space, well located commercial facilities axd the prese-nation of needed environmental amenities. Population dexity criteria or residential areas are presented within which a variety of 5welling types can be achieved and within which future services can be adeqJately planned and provided.

Development corridors are delineated alcnq iaajor highways of the county having growth potential. The uses inclilded in tlese._=ectors are those that have a strong necessity for accessibi1it:J.

7.

The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the need for well balanced and well planned commercial development. The P 1 m maintains <?at m increase in pre-planned, multi-purpose shopping centers should be encouraged and strip commercial development along major thoroughfares discourageci. A balanced pattern of community shopping zeas throughout the county should be encouraged with adequate provision fcr tke transportation system.

8.

The Plan proposes that industrial develcsment is expected to increase during the planning period. Most of the heustrial develoFment areas are located within or near the major urban zxeas. The county has existing natural assets, including rail, highway, ari wazer trznssortation which will continue to aid its industrial grokx5. Tu5lic utilizies services, including water, sewer, and gas are neekc? in t5e at'zaction of addi-tional industry. Policies are presentee whiz:? 3hou15 be XtilizeC! when determining location of industrial sites wi=?in the count-?.

9.

The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the LTor-ance of open s_cace as a major aspect of environmental quality. T t sro&wses to reserve prime agricultural land in the county for exclxsi-ze agricultural use. It proposes that every effort be made to prese-ve zke r.atural open space and recreational resources of the county-. Gf pzrticxlar concern are tne land and water areas along major streams the Tennessee River.

10.

The Plan emphasizes the need for continced cooriinstion efforts to keep pace with new approaches to problem solvinc.

6

2.

Development P o l i c i e s f o r Limestone County The r e p o r t formulates p o l i c i e s or county land uses:

housing, industry, commerce, and open space; f o r public f a c i l i t i e s and services:

w a t e r, sewer, recreation, health, f i r e and p o l i c e protection, s o l i d w a s t e and administration, and f o r transportation and other f a c t o r s concerned with county development.

The policies are designed t o provide a clear and consistent framework f o r 1

the Comprehensive Plan and f o r programs designed t o implement the plan.

They would provide a d i r e c t b a s i s f o r public and p r i v a t e action.

The p o l i c i e s represent what is both d e s i r a b l e and f e a s i b l e f o r county development.

They are based on analyses of the population and economy as w e l l as land development trends.

The p o l i c i e s proFosed are intended t o provide an action program d i r e c t e d toward implementation of the Limestone County Compre-hensive Plan.

SUMMARY

The proposed a c t i o n s and programs preser,teE i n the Plan are individual policy statements r e l a t i n g t o each of many aspects of t h e physical environment such as:

land use, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n, open space, e t c.

Therefore, the Compre-hensive Plan e s t a b l i s h e s a unified policy procram t o guide t h e future develop-ment of Limestone County.

The following is a con3ensed summary of t h i s policy program:

1.

The Comprehensive Plan assumes a population increase i n Limestone County of approximately 19,000 r e s i d e n t s betweer? 1980 and t h e year 2000.

Public f a c i l i t i e s and services a r e proposed t o 3e extended and expanded i n order t o adequately serve t h i s projected populztion.

The Plan a l s o proposes a decrease i n n e t migration, a higher medim age, and an increase i n the educational level of Marshall County residents.

2.

The Plan proposes, by t h e year 2000, t h z c wployment i n the county should rise t o approximately 21,OC)O workers, an increase of over 60% during t h e planning period.

Several economic c h a r z c t e r i s t i c s include:

a general decrease i n t h e significance of a g r i c u l t a s e as a major employing force i n the County; t h e trend t o a predominantly young labor Force, a declining unemployment rate, a r i s i n g median family income, an unusual strength i n r e t a i l sales and wholesale t r a d e, and a need f o r f u t h e r d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n of t h e county i n d u s t r i a l base i n order XI broaden i t s economic s t a b i l i t y.

3.

The Plan emphasizes the programming of capital-level public services t o serve the county r e s i d e n t s as t h e populztion increases and the demand or more and varied public f a c i l i t i e s m-2 services increases.

I n order t o provide county r e s i d e n t s with adequate public f a c i l i t i e s and services, over $4,745,000 i n c a p i t a l expenditures nust be allocated by the year 2000 4.

The Comprehensive Plan proposes t h e improveaent of t h e overall housing stock within t h e county by t h e year 2000.

In 1982, of the t o t a l I

I I

1 1

5

CHAPTER 2 FACTORS AFFECTING DEVELOPMENT The p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of L i m e s t o n e C0ur.z:~ have been major i n f l u e n c e s o n t h e q u a l i t y and l o c a t i o n of d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e Co.in=y.

A knowledge a n d u n d e r -

s t a n d i n g of t h e man-made a n d n a t u r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s

• l i t a l l y i m - w r t a n t t o t h e comprehensive p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s s i n c e t h e s e c h a r a c t e r : s C i c s p r o v i d e c h e basis upon which p h y s i c a l development p l a n s are f o r m u l a t e d.

The n a z u r a i r e s o u r c e s as w e l l as t h e e x i s t i n g l a n d u s e p a t t e r n w i l l act a s p h y s i c z l ~ Z E qeggr=phi:zl I i m i t a -

t i o n s upon t h e c o u n t y s p o t e n t i a l for f u t n r e p h y s i c z l ;zZwth and. E e - J e l o p e n t.

TOPOGRAPHY The e n t i r e c o u n t y of L i m e s t o n e l i e s w i t h i n rne -?r.:.?sseo

.all?y 2 i s t r i c t of t h e Highland R i m S e c t i o n of t h e S t a t e.

T k i s sec---

_ _ C. _ _ _ _ _ _ *.:rh:~!

t2e I n t e r i o r Low P l a t e a u s area of n o r t h Alabama.

The l a n d s u r f a c e i s a r o l l i n g u p l a n d w i t h els7.-zzic:. zzzgixg f z c a 556 f e e t above main sea l e v e l i n t h e s o u t h to 4 0 f t e t i n t>.e ~:zzr:-., 2r.d -19.5 z f s z a t t h e c o u r t h o u s e i n Athens.

The s m o o t h e s t p a r t s a r e Oi. zr.e z z z ~ c r i c g e zizs Serween t h e main c r e e k s.

Green briar, Mooresvill?, B e l l e !-!~F.z, s--i %arr%s 2ri s i t t e l m e n t s Of some of t h e smoother areas.

The s u r f a c e i s generr--y ~ o r ?

~ S L - L F. ~ ~ = : ~ c e n t t o t h e major stream c h a n n e l s, and s p e c i a l l y so n e z r 2 - 2 T s x 2 s s s e.<-:er.

The P l a t e a u s e c t i o n, l o c a l l y known 2s t5.e c r z y l z ~. ? ~,

=cc:=les 2.e r e s t of t h e c o u n t y n o r t h o f t h e L i m e s t o n e V a l l e y s.

T!-,is s e z z i = z :--as.di?s v z r l z r i o n s i n s u r f a c e r e l i e f - - s e v e r a l l a r g e areas are a l m s c le=-el :=

.:F.=:L~~:TI~

3 1 ~ ? ~ - t l y s l o p i n g, w h i l e o t h e r areas, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e iarr:-:-ssztrF.

&rzs 2

z.1.0-County, are b a d l y d i s s e c t e d.

The l a r g e s t of t h e s s ?:~:=?~.is

~.~rz~-.szsr-zrz rrorn n o r t h of B l a c k b u r n S c h o o l to a p o i n t n e a r t h e n o r r h E a r e r z c s r n e r of z;12 c o u n t y.

The h i g h e s t e l e v a t i o n s o n t h e P l a t e a u a r e 300 t o 55; fssz z k ~ e st2 L Z ~ J Z ~,

and t h e e l e v a t i o n a t t h e railroad s t a t i o n i n Zlkmont is t Z 3. 3 fesr. 7F.s r c u g h e s t and most broken areas are a l o n g t h e E l k R:.ier snd S:;zz

re=;? ir. f5.2 :kr=h-gorges 75 to 200 f e e t deep a n d i n places.Lon?

tt-.:ese s z r s z ~ ~ s,

z. 2 ~ ~.

- r 2 3 e d r o c k precipices up to 100 or more feet i n heig:?:.

~.

w e s t e r n p a r t of t h e c o u n t y.

The l a r g e s t screxns 17. z-:?z

> -5 2 r...-:.-

E 22: n ~ r r o w T h i s d i s s e c t e d area i s c h a r a c t e r i z e t b y n a r r z ;

..

• Z - - S T J S 2.76 nzrr=;.,

rind-i n g, s t e e p - s i d e r i d g e s and k n o l l s.

The slopes o f z e r. r=i.;e t3 6 3 or 70 P e r c e n t.

The A l l u v i a l P l a i n s s e c t i o n i n c l u d e s n e a r l y 1s.:?1 I=. cndul.zi?.c f - r s t bottoms and stream terraces a l o n g t h e T e n z e s s e e 27.2 x-.o E l k ?.:ve-rs,

~ 7. f zlonc; some o f t h e l a r g e r creeks.

The areas i n :his p h : ~ ~ l c ; r s ; ? ~ i z 3 ; 1 x ~ i i ~ : ~ r.

are from a few eet to m o r e than a mile wide.

The firs: ZC::_TIC

?:.-

SL::?~:

o o v e r f l o w from s t r e a m s whtai-e they art not Grotezte.5 z.. :?.-I-s;:srer 5:.zr=i~

-~

7

upstream on t h e Tennessee R i v e r a n d i t s t r i b u t a r i e s.

I n a d d i t i o n to t h e areas o r i g i n a l a l l u v i u m, t h e r e are some l a r g e s h a l l o w d e p r e s s i o n s, or s i n k s, through-o u t t h e c o u n t y t h a t c o n s i s t of local a l l u v i u m.

Most o f t h e s e d e p r e s s i o n s are s u b j e c t to a t least t e m p o r a r y i n u n d a t i o n d u r i n g periods o f heavy r a i n f a l l.

The stream terraces are o f t e n a s much a s 100 f e e t o v e r f l o w.

PHYaIOGRAPHY Limestone County is a part of t h e Highland Rim s e c t i o n of t h e I n t e r i o r Low P l a t e a u s p h y s i o g r a p h i c p r o v i n c e of t h e U n i t e d States.

I t l i e s i n t h e Tennessee V a l l e y and is comprised of t h r e e p h y s i o g r a p h i c s u b d i v i s i o n s : t h e Limestone V a l l e y s, t h e P l a t e a u, a n d t h e A l l u v i a l P l a i n s.

The first t w o of t h e s e s u b d i v i s i o n s cover most of t h e c o u n t y, w h e r e a s t h e A l l u v i a l P l a i n s oc-c u r a l o n g t h e rivers a n d c r e e k s t h r o u g h o u t t h e area.

The Limestone Valleys, l o c a l l y c a l l e d t h e r e d l a n d s, i n c l u d e t h e s o u t h -

e a s t e r n q u a r t e r of t h e c o u n t y as w e l l as o t h e r smaller areas a l o n g t h e E l k R i v e r and t h e e a s t e r n border of t h e c o u n t y.

T h i s s e c t i o n r a n g e s f r o m a b o u t 1 2 m i l e s i n w i d t h i n t h e e a s t e r n part t o a b o u t o n e m i l e i n t h e w e s t e r n.

CLIMATE Limestone County h a s a temperate climate a n d a b u n d a n t r a i n f a l l.

Temper-a t u r e extremes are rare a n d, d u r i n g t h e w i n t e r, periods of f r e e z i n g w e a t h e r r a r e l y last l o n g e r t h a n t w o d a y s.

Long t e r m r a i n f a l l and t e m p e r a t u r e records are n o t available for L i m e s t o n e County, b u t records for t h e H u n t s v i l l e area show a n average a n n u a l r a i n f a l l of a b o u t 52 i n c h e s, a n average summer temper-a t u r e of 80°F, a n average w i n t e r t e m p e r a t u r e o f 46OF, and a n a n n u a l average of 620F.

P e r i o d s of h e a v i e s t r a i n f a l l g e n e r a l l y o c c u r d u r i n g J a n u a r y, F e b r u a r y,

and March: periods of l o w e s t r a i n f a l l u s u a l l y o c c u r d u r i n g J u l y, August and September.

, MINERALS S e v e r a l t y p e s of r o c k masses a n d m i n e r a l s are located w i t h i n t h e c o u n t y.

The f o r m a t i o n s and deposits are of v a r y i n g i n d u s t r i a l u t i l i t y.

Among them are limestone, c h e r t, p h o s p h a t e, p o t a s h, s h a l e s, a s p h a l t i c l i m e s t o n e, s a n d,

s a n d s t o n e, and a s p h a l t i c s a n d s t o n e.

L i m e s t o n e u n d e r l i e s a c o n s i d e r a b l e por-t i o n of t h e c o u n t y and is found i n many i n s t a n c e s i n large o u t c r o p p i n g beds w i t h l i t t l e o r no o v e r b u r d e n.

A l a r g e s u p p l y of t h i s s t o n e is a d e q u a t e for ex-t e n s i v e u s e as a g g r e g a t e s, f e r t i l i z e r component, and t h r o u g h its l i m e derivative, i n t h e manufacture o f c e m e n t s a n d v a r i o u s o t h e r p r o d u c t s.

DRAINAGE The Tennessee River and i t s t r i b u t a r i e s comprise t h e d r a i n a g e s y s t e m of t h e c o u n t y.

Some d r a i n a g e is t h r o u g h s u b t e r r a n e a n o u t l e t s i n s i n k s ; and i n local-i t i e s where most of t h e d r a i n a g e is t h r o u g h t h e s e underground p a s s a g e s, t h e s u r -

f a c e d r a i n a g e s y s t e m is n o t d e v e l o p e d.

S u r f a c e d r a i n a g e is a d e q u a t e f o r agri-c u l t u r e, e x c e p t i n p a r t s of t h e f i r s t bottoms and i n some o f t h e s i n k s and de-p r e s s i o n s.

D 8

Limestone County o c c u p i e s p a r t s of t w o s e c t i o n s o f t h e I n t e r i o r Low P l a t e a u s p h y s i o g r a p h i c p r o v i n c e.

The n o r t h e r n part O F t h e c o u n t y is d r a i n e d by t h e Elk R i v e r i n t h e N a s h v i l l e B a s i n s e c t i o n.

The r e m a i n d e r o f t h e c o u n t y, d r a i n e d by I

1 t h e T e n n e s s e e R i v e r, is i n t h e H i g h l a n d R i m S e c t i o n.

Knobby s t e e p - s i d e d h i l l s, n a r r o w e l o n g a t e d d r a i n a g e divides capped b y t h e F o r t Payne C h e r t, and n a r r o w v a l l e y s u n d e r l a i n by t h e Chickamauga Limestone a r e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e N a s h v i l l e B a s l n i n Limestone County.

The topography of t h e H i g h l a n d R i m s e c t i o n i n L i m e s t o n e County is t y p i c a l l y a l o w, broad r o l l i n g upland.

D r a i n a g e divides are l o w a n d local relief is sub-d u e d, e x c e p t i n t h e area n e a r t h e E l k River where stream g r a d i e n t s are steeper.

The n o r t h - c e n t r a l and n o r t h w e s t e r n parts of t h e c o u n t y are d r a i n e d b y the I

1 I

1 I

I 1

E l k River.

L a r g e r streams i n t h i s p a r t of t h e c o u n t y are, f r o m east t o w e s t,

Ragsdale, M i l l, S h o a l, S u l f u r, a n d S u g a r Creeks.

The d r a i n a g e i n t h e s o u t h e r n part of t h e Limestone County is s o u t h to t h e T e n n e s s e e River by f o u r major streams which are, f r o m east to w e s t, Limestone, P i n e y, Swan, a n d Round I s l a n d C r e e k s.

WATER RESOURCES The m o s t developable n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s i n t h e c o u n t y appears t o be xater. It is v a l u a b l e o b v i o u s l y i n s u p p l y i n g commercial, r e s i d e n t i a l, a n d i n d u s t r i a l u s e r s,

b u t p e r h a p s is greatest possibilities l i e i n t h e f i e l d of r e c r e a t i o n and t o u r i s n.

If L i m e s t o n e County w e r e to e f f e c t i v e l y u t i l i z e i t s w a t e r r e s o u r c e s as o t h e r s u c h i d e a l l y p o s i t i o n e d areas h a v e d o n e, i t would f i n d t h a t its economy would ;sP-d i r e c t -

l y i n f l u e n c e d by t h e available t o u r i s t trade dollars.

Wheeler Lake, formed by t h e impounded waters of t h e T e n n e s s e e River, i s located i n t h e c o u n t y.

i t y b y c o n s t r u c t i n g Joe Wheeler Dam f o r flood c o n t r o l, w a t e r n a v i g a t i o n, m d hydro-T h i s reservoir was created by the Tenr.essee V a l l e y Author-I electric g e n e r a t i n g p u r p o s e s.

E l k River, located i n t h e w e s t e r n p o r t i o n of t h e c o u n t y, is also n a v i g a b l e f o r several m i l e s above its c o n f l u e n c e w i t h t h e T e n n e s s e e River.

M u n i c i p a l w a t e r s y s t e m s are provided w i t h i n all of t h e incor-Dorated dreas of 8

I 1

t h e c o u n t y.

Wells, s p r i n g s, l a k e s, streams, a n d c i s t e r n s f u r n i s h ample water f c r u r b a n u s e and a g r i c u l t u r e.

D r i n k i n g water c a n be had i n a l l p a r t s of t h e count:,;

however, w e l l s must be sunk t o c o n s i d e r a b l e d e p t h o n t h e u p l a n d p l a t e a u s.

IGROUND: WATER Ground water i n t h e Chickamauqa Limestone o c c u r s i n o p e n i n g s a l o n g j o i n t and Some o f t h e s e o p e n i n g s h a v e beer, e n l a r g e d t h r o u g h t h e s o l -

b e d d i n g - p l a n e s y s t e m s.

v e n t a c t i o n of moving ground water to form s o l u t i o n activities.

Wells d r i l l e d i n t h e Limestone must p e n e t r a t e o n e or more o f t h e s e w a t e r - b e a r i n g o p e n i n g s cr cavi-t i e s t o be s u c c e s s f u l.

L a r g e w a t e r - b e a r i n g o p e n i n g s i n t h e Cnickamauqa a r e f e w,

b u t w e l l s p e n e t r a t i n g t h e s e o p e n i n g s s u p p l y water t h a t is a d e q u a t e i n q u a n t i t y 2nd q u a l i t y for d o m e s t i c or stock u s e.

9

The Chattanooga Shale is n o t considered a n a q u i f e r i n Limestone County be-cause of its r e l a t i v e l y impermeable c h a r a c t e r and s l i g h t t h i c k n e s s.

SOIL ANALYSIS The v a r i o u s t y p e s o f soils e x h i b i t e d i n Limestone County w i l l affect any proposed l a n d devedopment t h a t t a k e s place i n t h i s area.

a f f e c t land development i n t h a t certain soil groups cannot s u p p o r t urban u s e s,

and t h e areas included i n t h e s e groups should be r e s e r v e d as agricultural o r open space l a n d s.

Soils i n p a r t i c u l a r w i l l A d e s c r i p t i o n of each soil g r o u p ' s effect on land development is provided i n t h e following paragraphs.

s t o n e County.

There are four m a j o r s o i l groups exhibited i n Lime-S o i l Group Number 1: T h i s group c o n s i s t s of Decatur, Cookeville, and Dewey t y p e s.

T h i s group c o n s i s t s of level area s o i l s located b a s i c a l l y south of U.S.

7 2, spanning t h e s o u t h e r n t h i r d of Limestone County.

L i m i t a t i o n s far urban de-velopment i n t h i s group are moderate; t h e l o w s t r e n g t h c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h i s group are i t s o n l y major drawback.

Urban development w i t h on-siEe septic tank can occur w i t h o n l y s l i g h t l i m i t a t i o n s i n t h i s g r o u p ' s area.

T h i s zrez also con-sists o f prime a g r i c u l t u r a l land.

S o i l Group Number 2:

T h i s g r o u p c o n s i s t s of Dickson, Sanaa, and T a f t soils.

The area covered by t h i s group approximates t h e n o r t h e a s t e r n quarrer of +&e county, t h e c e n t r a l area o f t h e county, and the upland ridges w e s t of t h s Zlc,River. The l i m i t a t i o n s on urban development are moderate, e x c e p t i n g d e v e l o p e n = x i z h o u t p u b l i c sewer s e r v i c e.

I n t h i s case, l i m i t a t i o n s are s e v e r e ; t h e r e f o r e, ?&lic sewer s e r v i c e, n o t septic t a n k s, should be provided or areas covered 3y z'nis s o i l group.

T h i s area c o n s i s t s of prime a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d, as does t h e area c~vl-rec Sy Group N u m b e r 1, a l t h o u g h n o t t o t h e e x t e n t of coverage as exhibited i n S n c ? ?Iuiir 1.

S o i l Group Number 3 :

T h i s s o i l group c o n s i s t s o f Bodine x-.E i d l e r t o n soils.

The a r e a s of t h e county covered by t h i s group c o n s i s t of t h e E l k X - z e r watershed, e x c e p t i n g f l o o d p l a i n areas and upland areas i n Soil Group Number 2.

L h l i i a t i o n s on urban development i n t h i s area is severe, 2uc to slope c h a r a c z e r i s a c s.

Bow-e v e r, urban development c a n t a k e place, provided adequate f o u n d a z i o x L-e used and p u b l i c s e w e r s e r v i c e is provided.

These areas, i n g e n e r a l, 50 n o t e x h i b i t areas of prime a g r i c u l t u r a l land.

t h i s group as it can i n a l l o f t h e o t h e r t h r e e groups.

~.

However, f o r e s c development CZCI zzke ?lace i n S o i l Group N u m b e r 4:

T h i s group c o n s i s t s of G u t h r i e, Abernatiey, and Lina-side soils.

Land i n f l o o d p l a n s c o n s i s t o f t h i s s o i l group.

Dus &J rhe p r o p e n s i t y f o r f l o o d i n g i n t h i s s o i l group, no urban development should t a k e ?lace i n areas covered by t h i s group.

A g r i c u l t u r e and f o r e s t development are t : ? ~

besr u s e s f o r l a n d u s e i n t h i s group.

T h i s information is s c a l e d for u s e a t t h e countywide level or.iy.

General p l a n n i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n s for l a n d use of a n areawide n a t u r e can be SupForted by t h i s l e v e l of i n f o r m a t i o n.

A developer i n t e r e s t e d i n s u b d i v i d i n g or developing land szo~Ld z o n s u l t t h e D i s t r i c t Conservationist a t t h e County a q r i c u l t u r 3 1 S ~ ~ V L C C

LA!):

.r ~ t :

its

Washing-ton 5trcct Ln A t h c n., or any information net.dcd f 3 i t n e purpose zf -cczi Land de-velopmenl.

C 10

TABLE 11-1 EXISTING LAND USE LIMESTONE COUNTY URBAN RURAL OTHER

( C i t y of A t h e n s )

(Unincorporated)

Ardmore, E l k m n t, L e s t e r Acres

% T o t a l % Dev.

Acres

% T o t a l % Dev.

Acres

% T o t a l % Dev.

and Mooresville TOTAL Re s i d e n t i a 1 Come rc i a 1 I n d u s t r i a l S o c i a l, C u l t u r a l,

and Governmental T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Corn.

& U t i l.

F o r e s t s A g r i. and Vacant Water 1, 287 9.0 3 50 2.5 200 1.4 374 2.6 1, 364 9.5 915 6.4 9,764 68.6 1 4, 2 5 4 100 36.0 4, 901 9.7 185 5.6 540 10.5 560 38.2 7, 625 77,640 1 4, 3 9 0 241, 088 345,923 1.1 30.5 248 7.4 0.0 1.4 32 0. 9 0.2 4.2 30 0.9 0.2 4.4 1 0 3 3. 1 2. 1 59.5 173 5.2 22.3 34 5 10.3 70.0 2,406 72.2 4. 1 3,337 1

42.3 5,436 5.5 567 5. 1 7 $0 17.6 1, 0 3 7 29.5 9,162 78, 900 253,258 14,390 3G3,52O

EXISTING LAND USE A d e s c r i p t i o n and a n a l y s i s of t h e e x i s t i n g u s e of t h e l a n d i n a given a r e a i s a v i t a l segment of t h e t o t a l p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s.

An understanding o f such i n -

formation can provide inva.Luable i n s i g h t i n t o both p a s t and p r e s e n t development t r e n d s i n Limestone County.

I t is a n awareness o f t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e s e t r e n d s which make i t possible,for p u b l i c o f f i c i a l s and p r i v a t e c i t i z e n s to under-s t a n d t h e p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e a s p e c t s o f development.

tude and l o c a t i o n of d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f l a n d u s e, it is o f t e n p o s s i b l e t o de-p i c t developmental problems which may a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t t h e growth o f t h e county b e f o r e t h e y reach crisis p r o p o r t i o n s.

By showing t h e magni-LAND: USE: CLASSIFICATION During t h e summer months o f 1982, a survey o f e x i s t i n g land use w a s con-ducted throughout t h e county.

The r e s u l t s o f t h i s s u r v e y provi2ed t h e basic d a t a on l a n d use c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and a c t i v i t i e s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e following an-a l y s i s.

The following c a t e g o r i e s w e r e e s t a b l i s h e d to c l a s s i f y e x i s t i n g land use according t o f u n c t i o n.

A b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s e c a t e g o r i e s are as f o l l c w s :

1.

R e s i d e n t i a l Development--Land on which s t r u c t u r e s housing one o r mre f a m i l i e s, p e r s o n s, or households are located.

2.

Commercial Development--Land on which commercial es=&lishmenEs such as retailers, w h o l e s a l e r s, and s e r v i c e f a c i l i t i e s are l o c a t e d.

3.

I n d u s t r i a l Development--Land on which goods are prccessed, r a n u f a c t u r t e,

or stored.

4.

S o c i a l and C u l t u r a l Development--Lane used t o p r o v i 5 e f a c i l i t i e s for e d u c a t i o n a l, r e c r e a t i o n a l, r e l i g i o u s, c u l t u r a l, local governnenz, and social f u n c t i o n s.

5.

T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development--Land used f o r f e d e r a l, szate, cou?t:J, 2nf municipal roads, highways, railroads, airports, waterways, anE r?tilities.

6.

F o r e s t r y and A g r i c u l t u r a l Development--Land on which f s d e r a l, sczte, and p r i v a t e woodland c r o p and p a s t u r e l a n d e x i s t s, a s w e l l 2s c x l r i v a t e d l o c a l.

LAND USE ANALYSIS The E x i s t i n g Land Use Map f o r t h e county i l l u s t r a t e s l a 5 i ~ s & f o r re-s i d e n t i a l, commercial, i n d u s t r i a l, social, c u l t u r a l, and goverxz-entai, foresced a r e a s and a g r i c u l t u r a l purposes.

The major urban c e n t e r o f Eke county is t h e C i t y o f Athens, c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a s t r o n g and c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i a b l e c e n t r a l kusi-n e s s d i s t r i c t and a g r e a t v a r i e t y o f l a n d usage on a more i n t e n s i v e l e v e l than a t o t h e r p o i n t s w i t h i n t h e county.

Secondary c o n c e n t r a t i o n s c f urban gr0r;t.i are located i n t h e s m a l l e r towns o f A r d m o r e, Elkmont, L e s t e r, and LKooresville.

This spread of urban uses a c r o s s t h e c ~ u r l t r y s i d e may S c ies-rrcea 3s ..rkz-u-u -

s p r a w l. "

Major problems accompany such sprawl.

T h e l a c k of zazmunity f a c i l i c i l i -

or t h e d i s t a n c e o f r o m e s t a b l i s h e d community f a c i l i t i e s is one cf the najcr pro-blems.

Lack o f p u b l i c water and sewerage a c i l i t i e s is a prokisrn also i n mn:;

12

c o f t h e s e a r e a s.

In some cases where homes have been l i n e d a l o n g an e x i s t i n g highway, they have i n c r e a s e d t r a f f i c c o n f l i c t and have reduced t h e e f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e highways a s w e l l a s adding danger to t h e roadside u s e r s.

Futhermore, such urban development o f both r e s i d e n t i a l and commercial u s e s h a s tended to c u t o f f t h e l a r g e r tracts o f l a n d between t h e roads, t h u s s t r i n g i n g b u i l d i n g s o u t over a maximum d i s t a n c e, i n c r e a s i n g s e r v i c i n g costs and reducing t h e e f f e c -

t i v e n e s s o f t h e highway.

With a l l t h i s, i n many cases, s u c h f r o n t a g e develop-ment r e s u l t s i n a c l u t t e r e d and congested appearance.

Where p r i v a c y and s e n s e o f spaciousness were prime m o t i v a t i n g factors i n b r i n g i n g development i n t o t h e c o u n t r y s i d e, it would appear t h a t t h e end r e s u l t may f r e s t r a t e t h e o r i g i n a l i n -

t e n t.

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT The l a n d use a n a l y s i s o f Limestone County's r e s i d e n t i a l development re-v e a l s t h a t t h e r e are approximately 14,300 year-round occupied d w e l l i n g u n i t s.

One t h i r d of t h e t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n resides i n t h e f i v e i n c o r p o r a t e d areas of t h e county:

A r d m o r e, Athens, Elkmont, L e s t e r, and Mooresville.

There is also a sizable p o p u l a t i o n r e s i d i n g i n areas along t h e major roads and highways where r u r a l community water systems serve t h e r u r a l nonfarm r e s i d e n t s.

Athens is by f a r t h e most d e n s e l y p o p u l a t e d area i n t h e county.

From t h e late 1930s to t h e e a r l y 1960s, Limestone County s u s t a i n e d a lonc-term d e c l i n e i n t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n.

I t appears, however, t h a t t h e t r e n d has re-versed itself s i n c e 1960; and Limestone County is now e x p e r i e n c i n g a AmFulaticn i n c r e a s e.

Most of t h e new housing development is t a k i n g place i n 'he e a s z e r n p o r t i o n o f t h e county w i t h t h e h e a v i e s t c o n c e n t r a t i o n i n t h e Czpshow French Yill area.

These developments c o n s i s t p r i m a r i l y of middle income housing.

There is also a s i g n i f i c a n t number of new d w e l l i n g units i n t h e Browns Ferry RoaE a r e z.

In both cases, r u r a l community w a t e r systems, i n a d d i t i o n t o n e a r n e s s to iiuntsville and Athens, have s p u r r e d t h i s growth i n e a s t e r n Limestone County.

The h e a v i e s t c o n c e n t r a t i o n of mbile home p a r k s i s i n t h e area east of Tanner and i n Lie Achens urban area.

F o r t Hampton is also growing.

The r e s i d e n t i a l development i n Limestone County c o n s i s t srimril:/ of t h e single-family d w e l l i n g u n i t.

The limited number o f multi-family s t r u c t u r e s E r e found i n t h e m u n i c i p a l i t i e s, p r i m a r i l y Athens.

A s t r u c t u r a l c o n d i 5 o r i s analy-sis o f year-round d w e l l i n g u n i t s i n Limestone County i n d i c a t e d a s u b s a n t i a l amount o f substandard housing.

D i l a p i d a t e d and d e t e r i o r z t i n g d w e l l i n 5 u n i t s are found s c a t t e r e d throughout t h e county with t h e largest c o n c e n t z a t i o n s i n t h e r u r a l areas w e s t o f Athens.

The r e l a t i v e l y high p e r c e n t a g e of t e n a n t farners i n t h i s area is a primary factor r e s p o n s i b l e for t h e high c o n c e n t r a t i o n of sub-s t a n d a r d u n i t s.

T h i s c o n d i t i o n also exists i n s o u t h and southwest Linestone County -

GROWTH PROSPECTS P o t e n t i a l i n expected r e s i d e n t i a l development i n L i m e s t o n e County depends p r i m a r i l y o n p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e s.

It i s expected t h a t :he m a j o r i t y cf t h e growth w i l l t a k e p l a c e i n and around t h e C i t y o f Athens and t h e T V A ~ r o p o s e d new r u r a l community o f Elkmont V i l l a g e.

L i m e s t o n e County's n e w h0usir.q w i l l be mainly single-family u n i t s w i t h t h e m a j o r i t y of mu1 t i - f a m i l y C O ~ I S : T ~ C ~ : O F I taking p l a c e i n t h e C i t y o f Athens, and t h e Town o f Ardmore.

ProvFded the Tcvri Elkmont constructs n s a n i t a r y sewer system, then E l k m o n t w i l l a l s o wi'_nrss new mu1 t i F a r n i 1 y construct L O I I.

1 3

Over t h e next e i g h t e e n y e a r s, new dwelling u n i t c o n s t r u c t i o n is expected to proceed a t an average annual rate o f 580 u n i t s i n Limestone County i n c l u s i v e of t h e m u n i c i p a l i t i e s.

I n t e r v i e w s with realtors and d e v e l o p e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e i r majar criteria f o r new s u b d i v i s i o n l o c a t i o n s are ( i n g e n e r a l o r d e r of p r i o r i t y ) : 1) land costs, 2 ) a v a i l a b i l i t y of w a t e r and s e w e r s e r v i c e, 3 ) amenity, 4 ) protective zoning and t h e c h a r a c t e r of nearby l a n d, 5 ) p r e s t i g e, and 6) t h e n e a r n e s s of e x i s t i n g roads g i v i n g access t o shopping and employment.

The i n t e r v i e w s f u r t h e r idicated pro-bable f u t u r e growth i n t h e immediate Athens Area, eastward a l o n g U-S-72. s o u t h from t h e C i t y of Athens toward Tanner, n o r t h and east of Athens tovaxe the Town of Elkmont, and west of Athens a l o n g U.S. 72.

Secondary growth c e n t e r s uould develop n e a r Lester, Salem, B e l l e Mina, and Greenbrier.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACTION The f u t u r e r e s i d e n t i a l p a t t e r n w i l l c o n t i n u e to be o n e t h a t is l i e e r s e d and d i s c o n t i n u o u s,

However, g i v e n t h a t r e a l i t y, p u b l i c p o l i c y c a a=?E s5ouI.6 encourage a h i g h e r q u a l i t y and a g r e a t e r v a r i e t y o f development.

O p p o r t u n i t i e s or improving t h e s t a n d a r d of r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l c r z e n t i n -

c l u d e :

1.

C o n s t r u c t i n g public works i n advance of fie developnenz 2-1 r r r k n d e n s i t y areas.

2.

Preventing t h e i n t r u s i o n o f incompatible u s e s i n t o r e 3 2 n - - r a i neighborhoods.

3.

Encouraging h i g h e r s t a n d a r d s i n s u b d i v i s i o n d e s i q n.

4.

Providing i n f o r m a t i o n on county growth t r e n d s an2 t h e k o u s i - 1 ~

market.

5.

S t i m u l a t i n g t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a v a r i e t y of 'nousins tlsss.

U s e of t h e above t e c h n i q u e s can encourage t h e p r o v i s i o n of 2 ~ 5 z c z r

-zariety of housing t y p e s, i n c l u d i n g r e n t a l and sale housing, for a l l irxcze 12-rels.

So can t h e a d o p t i o n of l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n s allowing a range of i n u i z L - f x n L y cie-velopment from townhouses and condominiums.

The major means o f enouraging better r e s i d e n t i z l developr.

i2.P.L 2x2 Z - J E r Z C P d e n s i t y zoning and planned neighborhood u n i t and new tokn d i s t r i c r s.

A11 s E ~ -

mulate i n n o v a t i o n s i n t h e d e s i g n and grouping of housing.

They sravil? =re u s e a b l e open space t o r e s i d e n t s and reduce p u b l i c u t i l i t y c o s t s.

With t h e i n c r e a s i n g cost of conventional single-family; hcus:nc, t:

is sro-j e c t e d t h a t multi-family housing w i l l p l a y an important role i n resizencial ex-pansion.

It is e s s e n t i a l t h a t multi-family development be s s r v e e ? f E i c F s n t l y by p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s.

High d e n s i t y apartments g e n e r a t e heavy t r a f f i c an6 should have a c c e s s to r o u t e s w i t h a high t r a f f i c - c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y.

The;: alss require p u b l i c sewer a n d water s e r v i c e.

P 1 4

TABLE: 1 1 - 2 ESTIMATKO DvlLLIffi VWlT CCNBTROCTIM. 1970-1000 1970 1980 1990 lo00 1 9 m-lo00 Total mt.1 mt.1 mt.1 k"

J u r l d l c t l o n U n i t s Units Unlta U n l t s Unltm Athenm 4, 5 8 8 5

• 598 6. 7 9 0 A r d s o r e 187 4 0 1 5 0 0 Elknont I I5 1 7 1 400.

L a s t e r 25 40 4 5 W r e s v i Ile I1 28 45 Limesone County 7,641

~

10.258 10.680 -

T O T A L 1 2. 6 7 7 1 6, 4 9 7 1 a. 4 6 0

~~

8, 1 5 8 600 5 0 0 55 5 0 L L. B I ~

2 1, 2 2 9

~~~

1, 6 7 0 I 1 I 165 10 19 4, 1 9 5 8. 5 5 2 SOURCE:

U.S. Bureau o f the Census ( A l a b a - I 1970, and T A K O G S t a f f P r o ) e c t i o n s.

I n c r e a s e in 1980-2000 p c r i o d a l s u m e s annexation of Elk River O e v e l o p H n c A s 6 0 c i a t ~ 0 n n e w community by To-of E l k m n t The l a c k o f a d v a n c e d u t i l i t i e s p l a n n i n g h a s typified many s u b u r b a n p---?rz-ments whose rapid g r o w t h was u n a n t i c i p a t e d.

c a n be f o r e s e e n i n L i m e s t o n e County.

I n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h P l a n proposals, z.5 local governments s h o u l d t a k e a d v a n t a g e of a v a i l a b l e f i n a n c i a l a i d s t o e s s e n t i a l f a c i l i t i e s i n a d v a n c e of development.

T h e s e a i d s a r e d e s c r i b e d 1.:

z. 2 s e c t i o n o n p u b l i c improvements.

Now, however, t h e d i m e n s i o n s 35 =rz-..,:+,

An i n f o r m a t i o n S e r v i c e c a n c o n s i d e r a b l y improve d e v e l o p e r s ' r e s p o n s i v s r. t s s to h o u s i n g demand.

I t would i s s u e p e r i o d i c summaries of r e s i d e n t i a l conszr.:=zian t r e n d s and p r o j e c t i o n s of h o u s i n g need a c c o r d i n g t o income, f a m i l y s i z e, 135 S Z : ? P ~

demographic f a c t o r s.

T y p i c a l l y, s u b d i v i s i o n and a p a r t m e n t b u i l d e r s a c t cr. i-.~

basis of hunch or past t r e n d s.

They l a c k a f a c t u a l basis or a n t i c i n a t i n c :.t~

n e e d s and t e n d to c o n s t r u c t o n l y a few u n i t s a t a t i m e t o see i f t h e i r prod:^:

w i l l s e l l.

Thus, t h e y f a i l to make f u l l u s e of e c o n o m i e s of scale.

The::

als2 m i s s o p p o r t u n i t i e s to c a p t u r e u n s e r v e d p o r t i o n s of t h e h o u s i n g m a r k e t.

C O b W RC IAL DEVELOPMENT The l e v e l of commercial l a n d u s e a c t i v i t y i n L i m e s t o n e County i s izfL.2?2ced by s e v e r a l f a c t o r s, t h c most i m p o r t a n t b e i n g s t r o n g c o m p e t i t i o n from s u r r o u n t i n g u r b a n c e n t e r s.

The d e v e l o p m e n t of r e t a i l and service e s t a b l i s h m e n t s h a s s u f 5 e r s d 15

c b e c a u s e o f t h e number o v a r i e t y o f s h o p p i n g f a c i l i t i e s i n n e i g h b o r i n g H u n t s v i l l e and Decatur.

A l s o, major t h o r o u g h f a r c s l i n k i n g t h e c o u n t y w i t h Birmingham and N a s h v i l l e make i t f e a s i b l e to do w h o l e s a l e t r a d i n g i n t h e s e l a r g e r u r b a n areas.

Athens, t h e c o u n t y seat, h a s t h e l a r g e s t number a n d g r e a t e s t c o n c e n t r a t i o n of commercial e s t a b l i s h m e n t s i n t h e c o u n t y.

A new s h o p p i n g c e n t e r, which opened i n 1981, h a s h e l p e d to r e t a i n some of t h e r e t a i l incoma p r e v i o u s l y s p e n t i n o t h e r cities.

The o t h e r i n c o r p o r a t e d towns have n e g l i g i b l e amounts of l a n d i n commercial u s e.

The l a n d u s e s u r v e y d i d, however, reveal a s c a t t e r i n g of s t r i p com.ercia1 development t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u n t y w i t h t h e g r e a t e s t c o n c e n t r a t i o n a l o n q U/S. 7 2,

a major t r a f f i c a r t e r y i n Limestone County which does n o t h a v e controllec', o r l i, m i t -

ed access s t a n d a r d s enforced a l o n g t h e right-of-way.

A h i g h e r q u a l i t y of s t r i p commercial h a s also c o n c e n t r a t e d a l o n g U.S.

31 a n o t h e r m u l t i l a n e r o u t e.

GROWTH PROSPECTS Commercial, i n t h e past h a s n o t been a major s o u r c e o f income for i i i x s t o n e County Cue to t h e p r o x i m i t y of t h e l a r g e r e t a i l i n g c e n t e r s o f D e c a t u r and S u n t s - i l l s.

It w i l l, however, p l a y a n i n c r e a s i n g role i n t h e f u t u r e d u e t o t h e p r s j e c c e d,race of p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e and t h e t r e n d of i n c r e a s i n g f a m i l y income.

The major c o n c e n t r a t i o n of commercial areas w i l l c o n t i n u e to LE 1:.

r k e Athens area.

The Athens C e n t r a l B u s i n e s s D i s t r i c t s h o u l d a t t r a c t on::?

1 i z i r s C r e t a i l growth and c o n t i n u e t o g a i n i n o f f i c e u s e.

O t h e r commercial c = z c ~ n r r a r i c n z w i l l develop i n t h e communities of Elkmont and Ardmore w i t h l i m i t e c C 2 1 ~ e l ~ 2 ~ e ?. t i n L e s t e r and Mooresville.

The U. S.

72 a n d 1-65 i n t e r c h a n g e provices a loca:ion f o r r e g i o n a l development as does t h e 1-65 and Alabama 20 i n t e r c n z n g e, i;esz cf Mooresville.

The c o n s t r u c t i o n of 1-565 w i l l a c c e n t u a t e t h i s p o t e n r i a l, 3: :.?r-c l o c a t i o n.

OPPORTUNITIES F O R ACTION The f o l l o w i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s for p u b l i c a c t i o n c a n h e l p p r o n o t e ---elL-kalazc-ed and w e l l - p l a n n e d commercial development i n Limestone County.

1.

The s t i m u l a t i o n of p r e - p l a n n e d m u l t i - p u r p o s e s h o p p i n q ce:.;srs.

2.

The encouragement of s h o p p i n g c e n t e r l o c a t i o n s a t a c c e s s ; o F ~. c s==

high-speed t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r o u t e s (1-65, 1-565, U. S.

7 2, Y - 2.. 21;

3.

The encouragement of a b a l a n c e d p a t t e r n of community sko;?Lr.;

azsss t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u n t y.

4.

The l i m i t i n g of highway commercial areas t o access p0ir.E~ zr, 5155 speed t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r o u t e s.

Over t h e n e x t e i g h t e e n y e a r s, t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t ty?e of corrnerz132 ce-velopment i n Limestone County w i l l be t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f p l a n n e d s h o ~ p i n c con-ters.

C o h e s i v e c e n t e r s, b u i l t a c c o r d i n g to s i n g l e d e s i g n, w i t h adsq.iace ~ u a n c i -

ties of o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g, are preferable to t h e unplanned commercial ri5bcns a l o n g m a j o r t h r o u g h f a r e s.

P l a n n e d c e n t e r s also a c t as magnets a t t r a c r i r., ; af?.:er u s e s, s u c h as o f f i c e s, a p a r t m e n t s, arid major community facilities.

I i

I 1

1 I

1 I

1 1

I 8

I I

I I

1 1

m 16

Land u s e p o l i c i e s should encourage the development of multi-purpose c e n t e r s which i n c o r p o r a t e o f f i c e s and community f a c i l i t i e s i n a d d i t i o n to r e t a i l and ser-v i c e u s e s.

Shopping c e n t e r d e v e l o p e r s w i l l p l a c e importance upon sites a t i n t e r c h a n g e s t o high-speed arterials and a l o n g major county roads.

the c e n t e r to maximize t h e s i z e o f i t s t r a d e area, which depends on t r a v e l t h e r a t h e r than p h y s i c a l d i s t a n c e.

I t also g i v e s t h e c e n t e r exposure v a l u e, t h a t is, v i s i b i l i t y to motorists.

L o c a t i o n a l and s i t e development policies should encour-age t h e l o c a t i o n o f shopping c e n t e r s near i n t e r c h a n g e s, b u t a t t h e same t i m e as-s u r e t h a t t h e t r a f f i c - c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y o f t h e i n t e r c h a n g e s and major roads are p r o t e c t e d.

T h i s type o f s i t e e n a b l e s Since f u t u r e p o p u l a t i o n growth w i l l t a k e p l a c e i n many p o r t i o n s o f t h e c o u n t y,

land use planning should p r o v i d e f o r a balanced p a t t e r n o f shopping a r e a s t o m a x -

imize choice f o r t h e p o p u l a t i o n.

C a r e f u l planning is needed also for local or neighborhood and community shopping c e n t e r s.

These c e n t e r s t y p i c a l l y serve 5,000 t o 10,000 people.

They are c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a supermarket and smaller r e t a i l s t o r e s and s e r v i c e es:ab-lishments, such as r e s t a u r a n t s, hardware, drug stores, and d r y c l e a n e r s.

The planned l o c a l shopping c e n t e r g e n e r a t e s moderately heavy t r a f f i c and should be d i r e c t l y a c c e s s i b l e to major t h r o u g h f a r e s.

The f u t u r e development o f planned shopping c e n t e r s should diminish the p r e s s u r e f o r s t r i p d e v e l o p m e n t a l o n g major highways.

The number of highway con-mercial sites should be s t r i c t l y l i m i t e d through l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n s.

They should S c related p r i m a r i l y t o t h e I n t e r s t a t e highway arterial newwork so C u t t h e needs o f t r a v e l e r s can e f f i c i e n t l y be served.

l o c a t e d t h a t no c o n f l i c t s r e s u l t w i t h t r a f f i c attracted by shopping c e n t e r s.

F i n a l l y, i n order t o reduce h a z a r d s and c o n g e s t i o n, development policies should c l e a r l y l i m i t t h e number of e n t r a n c e s and e x i t s from highway commercial dreas to throughfares.

F u r t h e r, t h e y should be so INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT Limestone County remains t h e least i n d u s t r i a l i z e d o f t h e f i v e councies i n t h e TARCOG Region.

Its geographic proximity t o b o t h t h e H u n t s v i l l e and k c a t u r has tended t o r e s t r a i n a f u l l r a n g e of i n d u s t r i a l d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n.

There i s,

however, a promising t r e n d toward d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n t h a t is most n o t i c e a b l e in Athens, A r d m o r e, and Elkmont, n e a r J. C. Calhoun Community College.

The c o u n t y ' s h i s t o r i c a l over-dependence on low-wage and l o w - s k i l l L n d u s t r i e s is r e a d i l y apparent.

There are o n l y a few t y p e s of i n d u s t r y with r e l a t i v e l y high or moderate wage rates.

The c o u n t y ' s i n d u s t r i a l p o t e n t i a l, however, is e x c e l l e n t.

Its e x c e l l e n t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c c e s s, a l a r g e number o f prime s i t e s,

abundance o f power and o t h e r r e q u i r e d u t i l i t i e s, and a l a r g e and a c c e s s i b l e labor f o r c e o f f e r advantages few o t h e r a r e a s i n Alabama can p r o v i d e.

The i n d u s t r y is p r i m a r i l y c e n t e r e d on Athens where both sewer and w a t e r s e r v i c e e x i s t.

S i m i l a r development a t a lesser s c a l e, a p p e a r s prime f o r Ardmore, where water and sewer s e r v i c e are a l s o a v a i l a b l e, and n e a r J. C. Calhoun Community Col l e g e.

17

Manufacturing a c t i v i t y i n Limestone County is e x p e c t e d to i n c r e a s e s h a r p l y d u r i n g t h e p l a n n i n g p e r i o d.

Over wider g e o g r a p h i c areas, however, Limestone County must compete w i t h e s t a b l i s h e d m a n u f a c t u r i n g c e n t e r s, s u c h a s t h e cities o f Decatur and H u n t s v i l l e.

The c o u n t y h a s e x i s t i n g n a t u r a l assets which w i l l a i d its i n d u s t r i a l g r o w t h C e r t a i n e s t a b l i s h e d m a n u f a c t u r i n g g r o u p s w i l l c o n t i n u e to expand and attract sup-p o r t i n g a c t i v i t i e s.

Limestone C o u n t y ' s e x c e l l e n t r a i l, highway, a i r, and w a t e r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n will be of b e n e f i t i n a t t r a c t i n g i n d u s t r y.

These facilities, i n a d d i t i o n to r a p i d l y - g r o w i n g r e g i o n a l m a r k e t s, s h o u l d s t i m u l a t e f u r t h e r w h o l e s a l e a c t i v i t y.

O P P O R T U N I T I E S F O R A C T I O N Limestone County faces i n c r e a s e d c o m p e t i t i o n from m e t r o p o l i t a n areas d e s i r -

i n g new i n d u s t r y.

I f t h e c o u n t y is t o c a p t u r e i t s projected s h a r e o f g r o w t h,

s t r o n g public a c t i o n must promote a n a t t r a c t i v e i n d u s t r i a l environment.

T h e r e are several o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r s t i m u l a t i n g local economic growth t h r o u g h i q r o v e d i n d u s t r i a l p l a n n i n g.

They i n c l u d e :

1.

C o n t i n u e d u t i l i z a t i o n of t h e Athens-Limestone Development Committee t o p r o v i d e a c o n s o l i d a t e d e f f o r t t o p r o m o t e, and t o f i n a n c e i n d u s t r i a l develos-ment projects v i a t h e A t h e n s I n d u s t r i a l Development Board.

2.

R e c o g n i t i o n i n p l a n s a n d l a n d u s e r e g u l a t i o n s of t h e new l o c a t i o n a l m o b i l i t y of l i g h t i n d u s t r y and w h o l e s a l i n g and t h e special l o c a t i o n a l n e e d s of heavy i n d u s t r y.

3.

C o o r d i n a t e d p l a n n i n g of roads a n d u t i l i t i e s for areas w i t h high in-d u s t r i a l p o t e n t i a l.

4.

P u b l i c encouragement a n d a s s i s t a n c e to p l a n n e d i n d u s t r i a l d i s t r i c t s.

Limestone C o u n t y ' s s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n of i t s labor force t h a t i s employed a t Cummings Research P a r k, and a t t h e NASA M a r s h a l l Space F l i g h t C e n t e r ane a t t h e U. S. Army Missile Command a n d Missile a n d M u n i t i o n s C e n t e r and s c h o o l ? r e vide a s o l i d basis upon which to a t t r a c t h i g h - t e c h n o l o g y i n d u s t r y s i m i l a r t o t h e above-listed economic a c t i v i t i e s located i n a d j a c e n t Madison County.

To be more s p e c i f i c, a n c i l l a r y h i g h t e c h n o l o g y - o r i e n t e d s e r v i c e companies e c o n o m i c a l l y l i n k e d to Madison C o u n t y ' s h i g h - t e c h n o l o g y "base" c o u l d be develoie2 a t Athens, A r d m o r e, Elkmont and i n S o u t h Limestone County.

The e x c e l l e n t r a i l a n d highway c o n n e c t i o n s d i r e c t l y t o w e s t e r n Madison County c o u l d foster s u c h i n -

t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n e c o n o m i c - i n d u s t r i a l development.

However, s u c h f i r m s and companies prefer, a l b e i t a l m o s t i n s i s t, upon l o c a t i n g i n a p l a n n e d i n d u s t r i a l p a r k.

The c h a r a c t e r i s t i e s o f t h e s e p a r k s are d i s c u s s e d b e l o w.

The p l a n n e d i n d u s t r i a l p a r k o f f e r s a desirable a l t e r n a t i v e to scattered i n d u s t r i a l growth t h a t h a s c h a r a c t e r i z e d many areas i n t h e past.

Industrialists a r e n o r u n l i k e homeowners; t

arc i n t e r c x s t e d i n an O v c ~ r ~ ~ l l plan a n d 1 3 W h a t 18

1 t

1 I

1 I

I I

1 I

I 1

I 1

1 I

I I

I t y p e s o f n e i g h b o r s t h e y m i g h t have.

Planned i n d u s t r i a l p a r k s w i t h adequate s t r e e t s y s t e m s, E l e x i b l e s i t c p r o v i s i o n s and p r o t e c t i v e r e s t r i c t i o n s c a n be d e s i g n e d t o most r e a d i l y meet t h e broad, a n d sometimes s p e c i f i c, n e e d s o f a m u l t i p l i c i t y of i n d u s t r i e s.

Planned i n d u s t r i a l p a r k s c a n a l s o p r o v i d e a f u l l complement o f s e r v i c e s and u t i l i t i e s to small i n d u s t r i e s which, i n d i v i d u a l l y, do n o t have t h e r e s o u r c e s to d e v e l o p them.

They also isolate i n d u s t r i e s from o t h e r u s e s a n d, a t t h e same t i m e, i n s u r e good d e s i g n a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t a n d a r d s.

They have been used as v a l u -

able devices for a t t r a c t i n g new i n d u s t r y and i n c r e a s i n g local t a x r e v e n u e s.

It is v i t a l l y i m p o r t a n t t h a t t h e g o v e r n m e n t a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s i n t h e c o u n t y program n e c e s s a r y p u b l i c improvements, i n c l u d i n g sewer and water services and highways, for areas of h i g h i n d u s t r i a l p o t e n t i a l.

The Land U s e P l a n specifically i d e n t i f i e s t h e s e areas.

F u t u r e p l a n n i n g for t h e c o u n t y must also t a k e i n t o account t h e l o c a t i o n a l m o b i l i t y of l i g h t i n d u s t r y and w h o l e s a l i n g.

A diverse number of employment c e n t e r s,

close to b u t compatible w i t h r e s i d e n t i a l areas, c a n m a t e r i a l l y decrease t r a v e l t i m e to and from work.

P o l i c i e s s h o u l d be framed to a l l o w a v a r i e t y of l i g h t i n d u s t r i a l and w h o l e s a l e l o c a t i o n s, y e t i n s u r e a d e q u a t e highway access and u t i -

l i t y service.

A t t h e same t i m e, the special c h a r a c t e r and r e q u i r e m e n t s of heavy i n d u s t r y s h o u l d be r e c o g n i z e d.

Its n e e d f o r port and r a i l f a c i l i t i e s and i t s p o t e n t i a l n o x i o u s n e s s t o o t h e r l a n d u s e s suggest restricted l o c a t i o n s close to p r e s e n t areas of s i m i l a r a c t i v i t y.

Such d e v e l o p m e n t h a s i t s f u t u r e i n S o u t h Limestone County, n e a r t h e G e n e r a l Motors Saginaw S t e e r i n g Gear D i v i s i o n P l a n t.

SOCIAL, CULTURAL, AND GOVERNMENTAL Broad d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n a n d numerous f a c i l i t i e s provide Limestone County re-s i d e n t s w i t h a h i g h q u a l i t y of o u t d o o r r e c r e a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s.

The Wheeler Lake Reservoir of t h e T e n n e s s e e River forms t h e s o u t h e r n boundary of t h e c o u n t y and h a s a l a r g e number of f a c i l i t i e s f o r numerous t y p e s of o u t d o o r a c t i v i t i e s.

T h e r e are 115 miles of streams s t o c k e d, a n d c o n t r o l l e d f i s h i n g i s allowed.

The E l k River area h a s some 59 acres w i t h h i k i n g, b o a t i n g, and o u t d o o r c o o k i n g f a c -

i l i t i e s available.

The C i t y of Athens a n d o t h e r m u n i c i p a l i t i e s m a i n t a i n m o s t l y small p a r k s,

b u t t h e c o u n t y is f o r t u n a t e to h a v e l a r g e o u t d o o r f a c i l i t i e s located p r i m a r i l y n e a r water r e s o u r c e s.

However, t h e s e f a c i l i t i e s are u n d e r d e v e l o p e d for r e c r e a -

t i o n a l u s e b e c a u s e m o s t of t h e l a n d is w i l d l i f e r e f u g e.

The l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n a l, h e a l t h, r e c r e a t i o n a l, and o t h e r c u l t u r a l and social f a c i l i t i e s i s a n i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f a c o u n t y ' s t o t a l d e v e l o p m e n t.

These f a c i l i t i e s are n e c e s s a r y f o r a n e n v i r o n m e n t which provides a h e a l t h f u l, whole-some, a n d p l e a s a n t l i v i n g e n v i r o n m e n t.

These are also t h e major a t t r i b u t e s which e n h a n c e t h e human v a l u e s o f a n a r e a, and hence its a t t r a c t i o n to newcomers and i n d u s t r y.

19

There are t w o scfiool s y s t e m s i n L i m e s t - o i l ( : County [Jrovidirlg e l e m e n t a r y, juri-l o r h i g h, and s e n i o r h i g h l e v e l e d u c a t i o n for some 12,000 s t u d c r i t s.

The s c h o o l s a r e scattered t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u n t y, b u t l o c a t e d s t r a t e g i c a l l y n e a r growth c e n t e r s.

Limestone County a l s o h a s t h e services of t w o i n s t i t u t i o n s of h i g h e r l e a r n i n g - -

Athens College, located i n A t h e n s, and Calhoun J u n i o r C o l l e g e, located n e a r t h e s o u t h e r n boundary o f t h e c o u n t y of U. S.

31.

Medical f a c i l i t i e s i n c l u d e two has-p i t a l s, t h e Limestone - A t h e n s Hospital i n Athens, and t h e J a c k s o n Hospital l o c a t e d i n t h e Town o f L e s t e r.

Most of t h e major government a c t i v i t y c e n t e r s are located i n A t h e n s, t h e c o u n t y seat.

Large c o n s e r v a t i o n areas a l o n g t h e w e s t e r n and s o u t h e r n b o u n d a r i e s of Limestone County a r e owned b y t h e U. S.

Department of t h e I n t e r i o r.

The most r e c e n t l y e s t a b l i s h e d major government i n s t a l l a t i o n i s t h e B r o w n ' s F e r r y Nuclear P l a n t o n t h e Tennessee R i v e r.

T h i s f a c i l i t y is owned and o p e r a t e d by t h e Tennessee V a l l e y A u t h o r i t y.

TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT Limestone County is served by main l i n e s of b o t h t h e L o u i s v i l l e and N a s h v i l l e Railway passes i n a n east-west d i r e c t i o n t h r o u g h t h e communities of Belle Plina and G r e e n b r i e r.

The L o u i s v i l l e a n d N a s h v i l l e l i n e passes i n a n o r t h s o u t h dire<-

t i o n s e r v i n g t h e communities of T a n n e r, A t h e n s, and Elkmont.

The c o u n t y has o v e r 1,000 m i l e s of federal, s t a t e, a n d local roads and highways.

The t w o major his:?-

ways are U.S. Highway 7 2, a f o u r - l a n e highway g o i n g east and w e s t.

In a d d i t i o r.,

I n t e r s t a t e 65, a l i m i t e d access corridor, passes i m m e d i a t e l y east of Athens, an5 p a r a l l e l U.S. 3 1, also a f o u r - l a n e highway.

A l a b a m a 2 0 r u n s e a s t from U1S. 31 a t D e c a t u r to H u n t s v i l l e ; i t s corridor w i l l be u t i l i z e d by t h e new 1-565.

The Tennessee River, s o u t h of A t h e n s, i s a y e a r - r o u n d n a v i g a b l e w a t e r d a y c o n n e c t i n g a l l p o i n t s i n t h e T e n n e s s e e V a l l e y to the c o u n t r y ' s great i n l a n d water-way s y s t e m, p r i m a r i l y the Mississippi River s y s t e m and t r i b u t a r y systems.

Limestone C o u n t y ' s n e a r n e s s t o t h e H u n t s v i l l e / M a d i s o n County Jetplex and t h e location of p r y o r F i e l d i n s o u t h - c e n t r a l Limestone County make a i r transport-a t i o n e a s i l y accessible t o the c o u n t y ' s p o p u l a t i o n, b u s i n e s s, a n d i n d u s t r y.

FORESTED AREAS O f t h e 363,520 acres of l a n d i n Limestone County, a n e s t i m a t e d 78,900 acrss are i n forest l a n d s w h i c h are n o t withdrawn from u t i l i z a t i o n a n d are p r o d u c i n g,

o r capable of p r o d u c i n g crops of timber.

A g r e a t v a r i e t y of s o u t h e r n p i n e s and hardwoods are found i n t h e s e forests g r o w i n g o n s i t e s r a n g i n g from t h e d r y,

s h a l l o w soils of m o u n t a i n ridges t o t h e r i c h, w e l l - d r a i n e d b o t t o m l a n d s o i l s of r i v e r v a l l e y s.

The m a j o r i t y o f t h e forest are located i n t h e n o r t h e r n t w o t h i r 2 s o f t h e c o u n t y i n t h e H i g h l a n d s mm Region of t h e A p p a l a c h i a n M o u n t a i n s.

b l o s t of t h e timber t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u n t y i s o f o a k and gum s p e c i e s of hardwood, which azc best s u i t e d t o b o t h t h e s o i l a n d climate of t h e r e g i o n.

F o r e s t l a n d s a t t h e p r e s e n t a c c o u n t f o r r o u g h l y o n e - f i f t h o f t h e total l z n d area i n t h e c o u n t y b u t have b e e n d e c r e a s i n g i n t h i s r e s p e c t f o r t h e p a s t d e c a d e.

Survey reports p u b l i s h e d i n 1936, 1953, 1963, and 1973 by t h e U.S.

F o r e s t S e r v l z c i n d i c a t e d t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e f o r e s t l a n d s to t o t a l l a n d a r e a s f o r t h e comt::

to be 2 4. 5 p e r c e n t, 25. 3 percent, 28.1 p c r c e i i t a n d 20.5 p e r c e n t, r e s p e c t i v e l y.

Though a s t r o n g i n c r e a s e o c c u r r e d f r o m t h e t 1 1 i r t. i ~ ~

u n t i l t h e e a r l y s i x t, ~ e s,

t o t a l a c r e a g e since. tliat t i m e tias dccl inc,tf s ~ i c \\ i tli;lt 1)reL;ciit f i c l ~ r ' e s are ~ I P ~ I L - ~ ' ;

21 [ w r c c n t less thaii wliat t h e y w c r i x r c ' p o r - t c

• d t o t i c 111 1 W - j.

c 20

The i n c r e a s e s i n f o r e s t acreage from 1936 t o 1 9 6 3 reflect a p e r i o d i n t h e c o u n t y ' s h i s t o r y when p o p u l a t i o n d w i n d l e d, c o u n t y economic growth slowed, and many acres of a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d were abondoned and allowed to r e v e r t back t o f o r e s t l a n d.

The e a r l y 1 9 6 0 ' ~ ~

however, s a w a n upswing i n t h e p o p u l a t i o n, u r -

ban and i n d u s t r i a l g r o w t h, a n d a g r i c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s.

During t h i s period of t i m e, t h o u s a n d s of acres o f f o r e s t l a n d s began to u n d e r g o t h e p r o c e s s of c o n v e r -

s i o n to a g r i c u l t u r a l a n d o t h e r l a n d u s e s associated w i t h economic growth.

Luck-i l y, l a n d which is n o t d i r e c t l y s u i t e d t o row-crop or p a s t u r e l a n d i s, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e Lester-Salem area, b e i n g c o n v e r t e d to f o r e s t u s e.

T h i s i s a positive t r e n d which s h o u l d be e n c o u r a g e d c o u n t y w i d e.

DEVELOPMENT ISSUES A p r i m a r y c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e Limestone County p l a n n i n g program i s t o b r i n g many factors which a f f e c t t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e c o u n t y i n t o focus i n order to d e v e l o p a p l a n n e d c o u r s e for f u t u r e a c t i v i t i e s.

T h i s s e c t i o n of t h e report i d e n t i -

f i e s a n d describes major i s s u e s i m p a c t i n g t h e c o u n t y and provides some d i r e c t i o n.

for f u t u r e a c t i o n by t h e c o u n t y leaders.

For e a c h i s s u e a series of o b j e c t i v e s is p r e s e n t e d which i n d i c a t e s some a c t i o n t o be t a k e n t o resolve t h e c o n c e r n s.

COUNTY GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT ISSUES I.

Land U s e Lack of l a n d u s e c o n t r o l s h a s c o n t r i b u t e d t o b l i g h t and c o n g e s t i o n i n u n i n c o r p o r a t -

ed c o u n t y areas.

ACTION OBJECTIVES a

I n c r e a s e t h e a w a r e n e s s of m u t u a l p r o b l e m s w i t h i n t h e c o u n t y a n d t h e need f o r a n e f f e c t i v e framework f o r d e v e l o p i n g s o l u t i o n s to t h e s e problems.

0 S u p p o r t t h e e n a c t m e n t of new l e g i s l a t i o n which would permit c o u n t i e s t o exercise l a n d u s e c o n t r o l s ( s u b d i v i s i o n a n d z o n i n g r e g u l a t i o n s )

i n u n i n c o r p o r a t e d Limestone County.

a Development o f l a n d u s e c o n t r o l s s h o u l d be c o n s i s t e n t w i t h p l a n n e d improvements o f major p u b l i c e x p e n d i t u r e s, s u c h as t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r o u t e s, water a n d sewer f a c i l i t i e s.

Development of t h e u n i n c o r p o r a t e d areas of t h e c o u n t y i s h i n d e r e d d u e t o t h e l a c k o f sound p l a n n i n g p o l i c i e s.

ACTION OBJECTIVES 0

R e s i d e n t i a l areas s h o u l d be located \\ii thin c o n v e n i e n t t r a v e l t i n e of s h o p p i n g a r e a s, employment centers ane community facilities and where p u b l i e u t i l i t i c s can be r e a d i l y I)rovidetl.

21

Areas should be designed f o r f u t u r e i n d u s t r i a l development based upon factors such as f u t u r e expansion, p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s, and p r o x i m i t y t o population c e n t e r s.

0 Provide f o r a balanced d i s t r i b u t i o n o f commercial and p e r s o n a l service i n planned sites throughout t h e county.

0 Provide t h e o p p o r t u n i t y for t h e county p o p u l a t i o n to choose from a v a r i e t y o f l i f e s t y l e s, d e n s i t i e s, and housing types.

Support and encourage policies which s t i m u l a t e t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n of new development of t h e unincorporated areas w i t h adequate p u b l i c facilities.

Growth i n t h e unincorporated areas of t h e county h a s o c c u r r e d i n a n uncoordinated, u n c o n t r o l l e d manner.

ACTION OBJECTIVES o

Maintain a n awareness of t h e need f o r proper d e s i g n, scale, d e n s i t y c o n t r o l, openspace, and o t h e r environmental c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n t h e p l a n n i n g and development of r e s i d e n t i a l areas.

Discourage haphazard, unplanned commercial development and promote t h e grouping of compatible retail and service o u t l e t s i n t o f u n c t i o n a l commercial c e n t e r s.

11.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The development of t h e county t o its f u l l e s t economic p o t e n t i a l should be c o n t i n u a l l y encouraged.

ACTION OBJECTIVES Areas which e n a b l e i n d u s t r i a l f i r m s to s h a r e common t r a n s p o r t a t i o n,

u t i l i t i e s, and service f a c i l i t i e s should be g i v e n p r e f e r e n c e.

Achieve a l a n d u s e p a t t e r n which i n s u r e s t h e most p r o d u c t i v e u s e of land w i t h i n t h e county.

Maintain a h i g h l y c o m p e t i t i v e and a g g r e s s i v e p o s t u r e i n economic development e f f o r t s i n order t o r e t a i n e x i s t i n g employers, a t t r a c t new i n d u s t r i e s and create a s u f f i c i e n t number o f new job opportuni-t i e s t o meet t h e requirements of a growing p o p u l a t i o n.

S t r i v e t o e l i m i n a t e problems which may hamper local e f f o r t s to pro-mote new economic development, e - g., housing, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n, and u t i l i t i e s.

Recognize t h e changing role o f a g r i c u l t u r e i n t h e county economy and t h e p o t e n t i a l impact t h i s w i l l have on e x i s t i n g and p o t e n t i a l m a r k e t s and land u s e p a t t e r n s.

22

I I

I I

1 I

I 1

I I

I I

1 1

I B

I 1

i HUMAN RESOURCES I.

HOUSING What measures can be t a k e n to i n s u r e t h e continued maintenance of t h e e x i s t i n g housing s t o c k or i n s u r e its replacement i n accordance w i t h county goals?

ACTION OBJECTIVES Work t o e l i m i n a t e a l l substandard housing and t o p r o v i d e s u f f i c i e n t housing i n q u a n t i t y, type, l o c a t i o n, and cost t o accommodate t h e a n t i c i p a t e d i n c r e a s e i n county population.

a The housing d i s t r i b u t i o n i n t h e county should be d i r e c t l y related to overall county development p l a n and t h e c a r d c i t y to p r o v i d e e s s e n t i a l services i n t h e unincorporated areas.

Information on t h e housing market should be p e r i o d i c a l l y f u r n i s h e d i

t o r e s i d e n t i a l developers.

The P r o v i s i o n of social services activities are l i m i t e d t i r o u g h o u t t h e county.

ACTION OBJECTIVES Encourage economic development which p r o v i d e s ample employment oppor-t u n i t i e s for b o t h t h e h i g h l y s k i l l e d and r e l a t i v e l y u n s k i l l e d segments of t h e c o u n t y ' s p o p u l a t i o n.

Encourage t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of l a n d f o r p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s p r i o r to t h e t i m e t h a t it is a c t u a l l y needed and i n l o c e t i o n s which are convenient to p r o j e c t e d service areas.

TRANSPORTATION How can t h e county t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system best accanrodate the t r a v e l demands of t h e county r e s i d e n t s ?

ACTION OBJECTIVES The street and highway system should be planned, d e s i g n e d, and develop-ed i n accordance with t h e a n t i c i p a t e d future land u s e and a c t i v i t y p a t t e r n s of t h e county.

2 3

E s t a b l i s h a f u n c t i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system o f primary and secondary thoroughfares, c a p a b l e of moving people and goods s a f e l y and e f f i c i e n t -

l y -

rn The county t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system should c o o r d i n a t e and i n t e g r a t e t h e v a r i o u s modes o f travel--highways arterial and local streets, as w e l l as p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s, ports, r a i l, and air--such t h a t t h e s e facilities are mutually complementary.

The t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system o f t h e county should be e f f e c t i v e l y used to direct f u t u r e development.

ACTION OBJECTIVES rn T r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s should be provided and managed so as t o reduce t h e e x p e n d i t u r e s o f human and f i s c a l r e s o u r c e s and be s e n s i t i v e t o e x i s t i n g and projected energy requirements.

rn The t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system should be u t i l i z e d as a means t o shape county development p a t t e r n s as w e l l as a d e v i c e t o r e l i e v e t h e problems which o t h e r growth f a c t o r s create.

NATURAL RESOURCES I.

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY What policies should be e n a c t e d by local government t o reduce t h e adverse effects of urban and r u r a l land use on a i r and w a t e r q u a l i t y ?

ACTION OBJECTIVES rn Encourage t h e a d o p t i o n of f l o o d p l a i n zoning r e g u l a t i o n s t o minimize p o t e n t i a l loss and damage due t o flooding.

The p o t e n t i a l environmental impacts of a l l p l a n s and d e c i s i o n s re-l a t i n g to county development, l a n d u s e, and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n improve-ments should be c a r e f u l l y considered.

Maintain a b a l a n c e between w i l d l i f e, t h e c a p a c i t y of l a n d t o s u s t a i n it, and t h e projected human p o p u l a t i o n of t h e county.

Land n o t d e s i g n a t e d or development i n t h e county development p l a n should remain i n a t t r a c t i v e open space by p r e v e n t i n g haphazard, pre-mature, and p o o r l y designed development i n such areas.

24

L I

I I

I I

I

11.

AGRICULTURE I f a g r i c u l t u r e is c o n s i d e r e d an a c t i v i t y worth s a v i n g i n f u t u r e y e a r s, can e f -

f e c t i v e p r e s e r v a t i o n measures be c o r r e l a t e d with economical s t a g i n g o f urban development so as n o t t o d i s t u r b r u r a l areas u n n e c e s s a r i l y and so t h a t t h e costs of government s e r v i c e s be k e p t t o a minimum?

ACTION OBJECTIVES a

The d i s r u p t i o n of p r o d u c t i v e a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d and n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s should be avoided i n t h e d e s i g n of new highways and o t h e r t r a n s p o r t a -

t i o n improvements.

a P r o t e c t prime a g r i c u l t u r a l soils from urban encroachment by channel-i n g i n t e n s i v e development t o less p r o d u c t i v e land.

a Provide f o r a smooth and o r d e r l y flow o f l a n d r e s o u r c e s o u t of a q r i -

c u l t u r e and i n t o non-farm u s e s as t h e need arises f o r t h e replacement o f r u r a l l a n d by urban expansion.

111.

OPEN SPACE, PARKS, AND RECREATION Which l a n d s can provide t h e m o s t meaningful open q a c e system based upon o u r human and environmental p r i o r i t i e s and o u r a b i l i t y t o pay d i r e c t and irdirect c o s t s of p r e s e r v a t i o n.

ACTION OBJECTIVES a

Provide r e c r e a t i o n and open space a r e a s throughout t h e county which are convenient t o u s e r s, accessible, and. x n i c h enhance Lie unique c h a r a c t e r and q u a l i t y of such a r e a s.

a Support t h e enactment of a p p r o p r i a t e land. use c o n t r o l s '10 prese-rve o u t s t a n d i n g n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s w i t h i n t h e county.

a Emphasize n a t u r a l b e a u t y i n r e c r e a t i o n a-d. open space s i a n n i n g and encourage a c o n s e r v a t i o n and r e s o u r c e development appr3acn i n con-s i d e r i n g t h e r e c r e a t i o n needs of the couzzy.

U t i l i z e open space e f f e c t i v e l y by p r o v i 2 i n g s e r v i c e t o Zeveloping areas through t h e p r o v i s i o n of r e c r e a t i o n space, s c e n i c and h i s t o r i c s i t e s, f l o o d c o n t r o l, and r e s o u r c e c o n s e r v a t i o n.

a M u l t i p l e use should be made of oFen s2aci areas.

PUBLIC UTILITIES S l ~ o u l d t h e p r o v i s i o n of p u b l i c s e r v i c e s be usee t o z o n t r o l w h e r e and wher. land development i n t h e unincorporated areas of ZOUT.~!;

xi11 o c c u r ?

25

ACTION OBJECTIVES Encourage l a n d d e v e l o p m e n t p a t t e r n s which would p e r m i t t h e m o s t e c o n o m i c a l e x t e n s i o n of p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s.

D i s c o u r a g e t h e e x t e n s i o n Of p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s t o areas which would promote p r e m a t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t.

C o o r d i n a t e t h e f u t u r e l a n d u s e p l a n for t h e c o u n t y w i t h t h e p l a n s f o r p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s b y p r o v i d i n g s u c h f a c i l i t i e s o n l y i n areas d e s i g n e d for d e v e l o p m e n t.

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

I 1

I 1

I I

I I

I c

CHAPTER 3 POPULATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS IN REGION Limestone County i s l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h e immediate s s n e r e of t h e i n f l u e n c e of Metropolitan S t a t i s t i c a l Area, one of t h e s t r o n g e s t growth a r e a s i n t h e S t a t e.

P r i o r t o June o f 1983, Limestone County w a s a ?art of t h e 3-county H u n t s v i l l e Standard Metropolitan S t a t i s t i c a l Area ( S ! I S A ) and w a s removed f r o 3 t h e SMSA (along with Marshall County) due t o a slow-down i n p o p u l a t i o n growth rate, r a t h e r t h a n a l e s s e n i n g of economic t i e s t o H u n t s v i l l e growth t r e n d s.

Much of t h e r e g i o n ' s r e c e n t p o p u l a t i o n char.ges is r e l a t e d t o t h e 2eclir.e i n t h e importance of a g r i c u l t u r e and t h e growing r o l e 05 i x d u s r r y and conunerze.

The d e c r e a s i n g demand f o r farm workers up t o about 1962 r e s s l t e d i n a s t e a d y out-migration of t h e local labor f o r c e t o o t h e r areds with ;nore manufacturirg job o p p o r t u n i t i e s.

By t h e m i d 1 9 6 0 ' s, manufacturinq ar.5 services employment had begun t o develop s t r o n g l y, spearheaded by t h e aerossace/defense boom i n H u n t s v i l l e, and t h e s i g n i f i c a n t secondary non-aerossace manufacturing growth promoted by H u n t s v i l l e ' s I n d u s t r i a l Development Associa-'

-102 -

The f i r s t dramatic impact p e r i o d i n t h e r e g i o n (ax2 t h e Limestone Count:/

a r e a ) began about 1950 w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n by t h e U.S. Goverx-ent t o move t h e h e a r t of t h e n a t i o n ' s missile and r o c k e t development t e a zo kiuntsville.

D c i x :

t h e s e e a r l y y e a r s, t h e Redstone A r s e n a l complex and t h e suF9orting i n d u s t r i e s i n H u n t s v i l l e were t h e f o c u s of t h e n a t i o n ' s space e f f c r t.

Hunts*.rille grew ? r z x a c i t y of l i t t l e more t h a n 15,000 i n 1950 t o t h e s t a t e ' s t h i r d m e t r o p o l i s 1:.

1970 with more than 137,000 people.

By 1970, t h e government funded aerospace/deferse k o o r i n H u c t s v i l l e ha6 undergone d r a s t i c r e d u c t i o n s, and t h e p r i v a t e manufact..rir,;

s e c t o r ( i e. Dunlo?,

PPG, GET) had become t h e dominant growth f o r c e.

I n t h e mid and l a t e 7 0 ' s n a t i o n a l economic r e c e s s l o n r r e n d s, coupled with energy r e l a t e d manufacturing p r i o r i t y changes cause? a slc.*.-down i n t h e r e g i o n ' s p r i v a t e sector manufacturing growth.

A s t h e job o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n c r e a s e d i n H u n t s v i l l e, t h e a 2 j a c e n t a r e a s s-c:?

as Limestone County w e r e impacted as w e l l.

Much of t h e growth i n Limestone County from 1955-1970 was a r e s u l t o f t h i s spin-off e f f e c t of expanding employ-ment i n H u n t s v i l l e.

The close economic a s s o c i a t i o n wizh t h e Y u n t s v i l l e ec0nom.i was formally recognized i n 1963 when t h e H u n t s v i l l e S t a n d z r e X e t r o p o l i t a n S t a t i s t i c a l Area (SMSA) w a s expanded t o i n c l u d e Linestor.e Zounty.

27

c In the 1970's Limestone County added several s,&statial private sector manufacturing concerns to its basic economy (ie. Marcec, Conn Ltd., Mobile Home Manufacturing, DAB and General Motors) to offset the reduced area jobs in Huntsville's declining aerospace/defense market. By the late 1970's, however, many of these local national manufacturing firms were forced to either reduce employment or curtail expansion plans due to national economic and energy cost factors. Thjs once again forced Limestone County residents to migrate from the area in search of productive employment.

POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS I N T H E R E G I O N Limestone County began its development when migrating homesteaders and families in search of productive farm land settled in rhe county. The agri-cultural development of the county from 1820 to 18EQ resulted in an increase of population from 9,871 to 21,600. From 1880 to 1921) tke status of agricul-ture, locally, experienced a steady growth. It was curin9 this period that cotton emerged as the major crop with livestock a-?E f i e l d crops also experienc-ing sizeable increases in production. Population curigg this period increased from 21,600 in 1880 to 31,341.

Since 1920, population growth in the counby :?as >eon slow and erratic, in-creasing from 31,341 in 1920 to the 1980 level of t 6, C 3 5.

During this period, Limestone County experienced the same out-migratiox z k t affected many other non-urban counties in the United States.

TABLE I11 - 1 PERCENT OF POPULATION C Z W E Area 1900-1910 1920 1930 1 9 4 0 4050 1960 1970 1980 2.1 14.2 10.3 Limestone County 20.1 16.6 16.9

-2.1 2.3 Huntsville SMSA 11.8 11.7 22.5

.6 0.3 41.6 48.3 9.3 TARCOG Region 14.0 13.5 12.1 5.1 2.3 13.5 29.8 13.8 n

r r

SOURCE: U. S.

Census of Population 1900-1980.

The 1960-1980 period, however, saw a substantial kcrease in population and the County experienced its highest rate of u~owr:? since 1930. This increase in population was primarily the result of the incsezss5 -sploTpent opportunities in Huntsville and Decatur: the construction of Lie E r c x n ' s Ferry Nuclear Plant and an increase in industrial development in the ccuzz~

in the 1960-1975 period.

28

TABLE I11 - 2 1980 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY RACE M i n o r i t y Area T o t a l Black Other Minority T o t a l Minority P o p u l a t i o n N o.

% T o t a l N o.

% T o t a l N o.

% T o t a l D e K a l b County Jackson County Limestone County Ardmore Athens Elkmont L,ester Mooresvi lle H u r d l Area*

Madison County Marshall County IARCOG R e J i o n A 1 aharna I JSA 53, 658 51, 407 46 I 005 1, 096 14, 558 429 11.1 58 27 371 196, 966 65, 6 2 2 413,650 3,830,061 2 2 6, 5 4 4, I3 2 5 939 2, 150 6,539 8

2,450 82 0

1 2 3, 387 39,069 1, 0 1 6 43,713 335,623 2 C ), illlf!, 21 H 1. 7 5 4.18 14.21

.73 16.83 19.11 0. 0 20.69 14-57 19.84 1. 5 5 1 2. 0 2 25.53 11. G O 181 267 115 5

46 0

0 0

64 3, 115 162 3, 840 2 4,750 1lfC,75,n17

.34

.52

.25

.46

.32

- 0. 0 0.0 0.0

.23 1.58

.25

.93

.64 5.1.5 1, 120 2, 417 6 f654 13 2 I 496 82 0

1 2 4,051 42, 184 1, 1 7 8 53, 553 1,020, 373 30,164,035 1

2.09 4.70 14.46 1.19 17.16 19.11 0.0 20.69 14.80 21.42 1.80 12.95 26.23 16.85

TASLE 111 - 3 POPULATION ESTIMATE AN0 ? W % E I O S S 1980-1990 BY RACE, SEX AN0 ST-ECE3 AGE ZROUTS (AS OF Z2LY 11 L1MES"JtIE COLYn

~

Rdce, Sex

\\L'e,roui 198C 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990

.~

'rota1 4 6, 0 0 0

'. -4 3,526 5-3 3,728 lu-14 4, 2 3 0

5-19 4, 5 3 6

";-24 3,969 2 5 - : ?

3, 5 3 3 3 0 - 3 4 3,345 25-39 2,849 4ii-44 2.619 45-45 2, 4 5 1 59-54 2, 2 5 9 55-59 2, 1 7 8 60-64 1, 8 7 7 65 6 Over 4, 9 0 5 Total 100.00 5 - 4 7.67 5-?

8.10

!3-14 9. 2 0

?5-1!

9.86 8. 6 3 25-29 7.68 10-34 7.27 35-30.

6. 1 9 30-44 5. 6 9 45-49 5.33 4.91

3<

j j. j:,

4. 7 3 6J-64 4. 0 8 65 6 '3ver 10.66 4 7, 3 0 0 3, 6 7 0 3, 8 3 0 4, 2 1 0 4, 5 0 0 4,OlC; 1,65C 3, 4 5 0 2, 9 6 0 2, 7 8 0 2, 5 6 0 2, 350 2, 2 4 0 1, 9 5 0 5.150 100.00 7. 7 6 8.10 8. 9 0 9.51 8. 4 3 7. 7 2 7. 2 9 6. 2 6 5. 8 8 5. 4 1 4. 9 7 4.74 4.12 13.30 47.700 3, 7 3 0 3.870 4, 1 3 0 4, 4 2 0 3,980 3,680 3, 5 0 0 3,000 2, 8 6 0 2, 5 9 0 2, 3 8 0 2, 2 6 0 1,960 5, 2 9 0 100.00 7.82 8.11 8. 6 6 9.27 8. 3 4 7. 7 1 7.34 6. 2 9 6.00 5. 1 3 4.99 4. 7 6 4. 1 1 1 1. 0 9 48,100 3, 8 0 0 3,900 4, 0 5 0 4, 3 2 0 3,960 3, 7 2 0 3, 5 5 0 3, 0 5 0 2, 9 4 0 2, 6 5 0 2, 4 3 0 2, 2 8 0 1,990 5, 4 2 0 100.00 7. 9 0 8.11 8. 4 2 8.98 8. 2 3 7. 7 3 7.38 6.34 6.11 5. 5 1 5.05 4.7; 4. 1 4 11.27 48.400 48.800 3,850 3,920 3, 9 3 0 3,350 4, 2 4 0 4.150 3.940 3.5.10 3,760 3,:3C 3, 5 9 0 3, 6 3 0 3, 1 1 0 3,:SsC 3, 0 2 0 3,110 2,690 2.7;C 2,450 2, 5 5 0 2,290 2. 3 2 2 2,010 2,::c 5, 5 4 0 5. i 3 S PERCENT D I S X I S L T I O S 100.00 103.x 7.95 8.53 8. 1 2 i.39 8. 1 8 7.37 8. 7 6 2. 5 2 6.31 5.14 7.77 7.42 7.::

6. 4 3 6. 4 5 6.24 6. 3 7 5.56 3.0-5.06 5. 1 2 4. 7 3 r:

4.15 4.14 1 1. 4 5 1l.ii 3.960 3

~

~

8 1 --

49,2C,C 3, 5.22 3. 0 9 3 3.312 4, 0 6 2 3, 8 9 3 3, 3 4 3 3,6E5 3,2CC 3, 1 7 2 i.77:

2,542 2, 3 4 :

1,152 5, 5 3 3 LCO. c.;

8.C3 8.11 I. # 4 8.i5 7.91 1.23 7. 4 E 6. 4 4 c. 3.

i. c:

3. - c

... I =

G9.500 4, 0 3 0 4.030 3,710 3.980 3.86C 3,380 3,710 3,240 3.27G 2, 9 2 0 2,560 2, 3 7 0 2, 0 7 3 5. 960 i3.0. 0c 8. 1 4 5.14 7.49 2. 0 4 7. 5 0 i. 8 4 7.49 6.61 5.17 4. 7 5 4.16 1:.

94 E i c --

2. I 4 9, 8 0 0 4, 0 9 0 4.040 3,640 3,880 3.830 3,910 3, 7 6 0 3,330 3, 3 5 0 2, 8 7 0 2.61C 2.360 2,09C 6,080 100.00 8. 2 1 8.'1 7. 3 1 7. 7 9 1. 6 9 7.85 7.55 6.62 6. 7 2 5. i 5.24 4. 7 4 4.2;

!.2.::

50.200 5 0, 4 0 0 4, 1 5 0 4, 2 0 0 4,080 4, 1 0 0 3.560 3,490 3,790 3,730 3.810 3, 7 8 0 3,950 3, 9 7 0 3,800 3,830 3,340 3,380 3,430 3,490 2,900 2, 9 4 0 2,640 2, 6 7 0 2,390 2, 4 1 0 2,120 2, 1 3 0 6, 2 2 0 6, 3 2 0 100.00 100.00 8.27 8.33 8.13 8. 1 3 7.09 6. 9 2 7.55 7.40 7.59 7.53 7.87 7.88 7.57 7.60 6. 6 5 6.71 6.83 6.92 5.78 5. 8 3 5.26 5.30 4.76 4. 7 8 4.22 4. 2 3 12.39 12.54 SOURCE:

Alabama S t a t e Data C e n t e r, Center For B u s i n e s s and E c ~ n o x z

?.ese?:;?,,

7Ce :?.iversrty of XZL-A.

!IOTE:

D e t a i l s Do N o t N e c e s s a r i l y Add To T o t a l s Due to Round;-g.

30

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I In addition, the l o c a l manufacturing growth, i n the m i d 1970's (previously highlighted) contributed substantially t o the retention of l o c a l population which would have out-migrated a s a r e s u l t of regional job s l o w downs.

By 1979-82, however, the stagnation of t h e local manufacturing sector had again created an out-migration trend.

The current population as of July 1, 1983 i s estjmated a t 48,100, repre-senting a 4.6 percent increase since 1980.

COUNTY GROWTH TRENDS Current national population trends have included a s h i f t from r u r a l areas t o urbanized areas.

Limestone County is a l s o experiencing t h i s s h i f t i n popu-latior?, evidenced by t h e decrease i n r u r a l population i n t h e county from 74.4 percent i n 1960 t o 65.5 percent i n 1970 and 59.5 percent i n 1980.

Despite t h i s trend, the proportion of the population of the county t h a t could be considere2 urban is s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y below the s t a t e average.

Because of the location of Limestone County and the growth of Nor-A Alabma, i n the counties adjacent t o t h e Tennessee River, the county can be expected t o become increasingly more urban i n the future.

In Limestone County, the City of Athens i s the only s l c n i f i c a n t urban area.

In the future, with t h e projected growth south from the City of Athens t o the Tennessee River and east of t h e City of Athens toward the Euntsville Ma6ison County J e t p o r t, an increasing proportion of Limestone County residents may be c l a s s i f i e d as "urban county" (those persons living i n s m a l l comnunities and i?.

urban-type developments t h a t are not incorporated.)

The s i z e and location of t h i s "urban county" population w i l l pose se-ieral problems f o r Limestone County i n t h e future.

This type of geoqraphic " s s r a w l "

development is usually d i f f i c u l t t o serve with water and sewer f a c i l i t i e s as w e l l a s other cornunity f a c i l i t i e s and services and is not presently con-t r o l l e d by o r afforded the b e n e f i t of land use controls such as zoninq acd su5-division regulations.

Because of these and other f a c t o r s, it i s extrael:i i m -

portant t o plan a t t h e county l e v e l t o keep t h i s rapid type of growth frcn de-veloping i n a haphazard manner c o s t l y t o both c i t i z e n s anE l o c a l governments.

POPULATION -C 0 M P 0 s I TI 0 N The composition of t h e population by age, sex, and r a c i a l croups ane t-ends r e l a t e d t o t h i s composition a r e important planning f a c t o r s.

Changes i z t h e age, sex, and racial s t r u c t u r e s a f f e c t f a c e t s of county govern-nent such as housicc, schools, recreation needs, f a c i l i t i e s f o r the e l d e r l y, welfare Frograms, and 5 e provision of public u t i l i t i e s and services.

Such changes also a f f e c t vzrious types of r e t a i l s a l e s, the labor force, and the overall economic productivity and p o t e n t i a l of t h e community.

31

The most notable changes i n t h e age composition of t h e TARCOG r e g i o n ' s population since 1950 have been t h e growing proportion of o l d e r people and the decline i n the very young.

The r a p i d l y increasing proportion of e l d e r l y has been caused by: 1) t h e out-migration of t h e younger, more productive residents; 2 ) a s l i g h t in-migratiop,of those a t retirement age; along with

3) a steady decline i n t h e r e g i o n ' s b i r t h r a t e ; and 4) an increased l i f e ex-pectancy through h e a l t h and n u t r i t i o n a l service advances.

Limestone County's age composition has changed considerably during t h e 1960-1980 period as i n most r u r a l counties.

The under-five population declined (from 12.0 t o 7.5 percent of t o t a l population) and t h e 5 t o 14 group decreased (by more than 450 (from 23.2 percent of 17.4 percent) each of t h e o t h e r age groups increased t h e i r proportional share of t h e population.

The "aging" of t h e population, through reduced b i r t h r a t e s, out-migration and increased longevity w a s t h e most dramatic i n t h e 15-34 years-old " p r i m e workforce" group and t h e 55 and over "older" and " r e t i r e d " workforce age g r o u ~.

The 15-34 year-old group grew by 52.7 percent from 1960 (10,054 persons) t o 1980 (15,355 persons) and rose from 27.5 percent t o 33.4 percent of t h e c o t a i population.

The age 55 p l u s population group increased by almost 3,500 i n the decade, from 15.0 percent of t o t a l population t o 19.4 percent.

The median age i n Limestone County i n 1980 w a s 29.2 years, an increase of 3.5 years over t h e 1970 f i g u r e of 25.7, and 4.8 years.?hove t h e 1960 l e v e l of 24.4 years.

Limestone's 1980 median age w a s the sane as t h e state-wide average, however the 13.6 percent increase from 1970 was almost double t h e state increase rate of 7.4 percent from 1970-80.

Sex The sex r a t i o ( t h e number of males t o females) i s a l s o i n d i c a t i v e of 7renE.s which may be taking place i n t h e county.

Generally, females comprise a large percentage of the t o t a l population.

This is due t o two b a s i c factors:

1) females have a longer l i f e expectancy, and 2 ) fenales have less tendency t o out-migrate.

In t h i s r e s p e c t, females predominzte Ln t h e Limestone County 2 0 9 ~ -

l a t i o n.

In 1970 there w e r e 96.2 males per 100 females i n Limestone County ane i n 1980 t h i s had decreased t o 95.2 males per 100 fenales, a 1.0 percent decresse i n the proportion of males.

Both the national and t h e s t a t e r a t i o of males t3 females w a s 95 and 92.5 respectively of males per 1 0 0 fenales i n 1980.

Table I1 indicates t h a t t h e population of Limestone CcunYj is becoming increasincly more female i n i t s makeup.

The primary reason f o r t h i s trend i s t h a t the Frevious outmigration trend of males has continued because of recent l o c a l and regional reductions i n employment opportunities available t o males i n t n e county.

The limited data which i s available f o r 1960-1383 i n d i c a t e s that due t3 a lack of major new i n d u s t r i a l development i n Limestone County during t h i s pertot5 32 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

I I

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

m there will be only a minor slow down, but no reverse in the out-migraticn of males unless new industries, which employ, primarily, males at high-wage levels locate in the region, and ideally in Limestone County itself.

TABLE I11 - 4 PEPCENT DISTRIBUTION OF THE POPULATION BY SEX

-.I Area 1960 1970 1960 Male Female Male Female Male Fernale City of Athens 47.4 52.6 47.9 52.1 46.5 53.5 TARCOG Region 49.6 50.4 49.0 51.0 48.7 51.3 Alabama 48.7 51.3 48.2 51.8 46.3 53.-

Limestone County 49.4 50.6 49.0 51.0 47.6 52.4 SOURCE: 1960, 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census of Population Race The TARCOG region's racial composition has changed only slightly 1:.

t : ? ~

p z s r twenty years. The most readily apparent change has been the gradual dezlkc I n the percentage of Blacks in Limestone and Marshall Counties.

Limestone County has registered increases in White population and 5ecrease-c The gain in whits ?oc7dz-in Black population or each of the past two decades.

tion was, by far, the greatest during the most recent decade--over 19 psrce~.~

CCI-pared to just under 5 percent in the 1950-1960 period. Limestone County hze (prs-portionately) the largest Black population in the TARCOG counties at 17 2 e r c e n r in 1970. This percentage has declined during each of the past three decaees frs-.

almost 23 percent in 1950 to approximately 17 percent in 1970, and just aver 14.2 percent in 1980. In 1980, the Madison County population reached 19.8 F S ~ C ~ T - :

Black (21.4 percent total minority) and eclipsed Limestone as both absclute =nc proportional minority/Black populated county in the TARCOG region.

7 o - -

In Athens in 1970, Blacks comprised 17.6 percent of the populatior.. 3y L ~ Z -,

this had dropped to 16.8 percent.

lation in Athens increased substantially during the 1960-1970 period. Ir. 136.3, the Black population was 1,161 or 12.4 percent of the population, and ir. 1?-3.

2,536 or 17.6 percent. This represents an increase of 1,375 or 118.4 ~ 5 r c e r. r.

This increase was basically due to a large annexation to the city duric:

6:'s in which 4,933 people were added to Athens with approximately 25-30 perzer,t of them being Black.

It should be pointed out that the B ~ E c X

O~U-The 1970-80 decrease in the Black population (proportionally) can be Z S C E ~

to three primary factors: 1) a decline in birth rates; 2) out-migraticn 'CG JJ

nearby c o u n t i e s ( e s p e c i a l l y Madison) f o r j o b s ; and 3) t h e f a c t t h a t most of t h e 1970-80 annexation t o t h e C i t y of Athens w a s predominantly White s u b d i v i s i o n s.

PROJECTED POPULATION The following p o p u l a t i o n p r o j e c t i o n s are designed t o d e p i c t an estimate of f u t u r e growth, based upon t h e assumption t h a t - e x i s t i n g long-term t r e n d s i n population continue i n t o f u t u r e decades.

The p r o v i s i o n of adequate p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s such as s c h o o l s, p a r k s, h e a l t h f a c i l i t i e s, and w a t e r and s e w e r are p r e d i c t e d based upon an a n a l y s i s of such population p r o j e c t i o n.

A l l f a c i l i t y needs i n Limestone County follow d i r e c t l y from an a n a l y s i s of t h e needs c r e a t e d by f u t u r e population based upon recognized development s t a n d a r d s f o r such f a c i l i t i e s.

TABLE I11 - 5 POPULATION TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS BY AGE GROUP LIMESTONE COUNTY 1960-2000 Age Group 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 0-4 5-14 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 6 5+

TOTAL 4, 383 8,456 5,713 4, 341 4, 338 3,802 2, 668 2,812 36, 513 4,159 8, 908 7,366 5, 341 4, 620 4, 211 3,454 3,640 41, 699 3, 453 8, 000 8,518 6, 837 5,485 4,031 4, 904 46, 005 4, 777 4, 200 7,590 7

I 510 7,800 6,870 5,610 4,540 6,320 50,400 4,875 9, 815 8,385 10, 400 9,750 6,825 5

I 850 9,100 65,000 SOURCE:

1960, 1970 and 1980 f i g u r e s, U.S. Census Of P o p u l a t i o n ; 1990-200Ofiqures, Modified Step-Down Method.

ADO and TARCOG.

Limestone County's p o p u l a t i o n can be expected t o r e t u r n t o an i n c r e a s i n g growth rate once t h e f u l l impact of p e r c e n t developments, such as t h e slow-down and subsequent r e h i r i n g s a t t h e General Motors P l a n t are f e l t i n t h e county.

Recent developments, elsewhere i n t h e economy w i l l tend t o a t t r a c t p o p u l a t i o n,

as w i l l o t h e r p r o j e c t e d i n d u s t r i a l and commercial concerns l o c a t i n g i n c l o s e proximity t o t h e C i t y of Athens.

Without a d d i t i o n a l s l o w downs a t l a r g e major f a c i l i t i e s such as t h e General Motors P l a n t, Limestone County's l o c a t i o n i n t h e H u n t s v i l l e Metropolitan S t a t i s t i c a l A r e a and t h e c o u n t y ' s a c c e s s t o markets i n c i t i e s such as Decatur, Birmingham, and Nashville w i l l tend t o provide an impetus f o r a r e t u r n of economic growth and development i n Limestone County.

34 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

1 I

I 1

1 I

I EDUCATION A high educational level is considered a good indicator of the a b i l i t y t o obtain suitable employment and earn a n adequate income.

The increasing complexit,.

and technical nature of society makes education more and more important.

The level of education determines t o a large degree the quality of the a v a i l a b k labor force i n an area, and i n turn, the wage level of the industries which can be attracted t o an area.

L E V E L O F ATTAINMENT While the educational level of Limestone County improved significantly between 1970 and 1980 it w a s still below t h e education level of the United States, the S t a t e, and the TARCOG Region.

The percentage of persons 2 5 years old and over who had a t l e a s t a high school education was a l s o below other geographic reas as.

State-wide i n 1980, 56.6 percent of the population 25 years old and over had a t l e a s t a high school education compared t o only 50.7 per-cent i n Limestone County.

Both the S t a t e and Limestone County lagged the national r a t e of 78.7 percent high school graduates.

TABLE I11 - 6 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT, 1960-1970-1980 LIMESTONE COUNTY, ALABAMA School Years Completed 1960 1970 1980 Persons 25 years old and over No school years completed Elementary 1-4 years 5-8 years High School 1-3 years 4 years Co 1 leg e 1-3 years 4 years or more Median School Years Completed Percent High School Graduates 17,957 100.0 21,185 100.0 26,034 100.0 645 3.6 433 2.0 7,887 30.0 2, 995 16.7 2,057 9.7 6, 817 38.0 6,252 29.5 3,205 1 7. 8 4,484 2 1. 2 4, 950 1 9. 0 31.8 2, 692 15.0 5,239 24.7 876 4. 9 1, 4 1 1 6.7 2,648 10.2 727 4.0 1, 309 6.2 2,277 8. 7 8. 3 10.3 23.8 37.1 50.7 8,272 1 2. 0 SOURCE:

1960, 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census of Population.

However the Limestone County growth i n High School graduate percentage from 1970-80 was over 13.5 percent, and a s such, was significantly above the State i n -

crease of only 5. 3 percent, and indicating a strong e f f o r t a t the county level to overcome past deficiencies.

T h i s growth e f f o r t is also reflected by the f a c t that the Limestone County median school years figure of 12.0 years was o n l y. 3 years below the state-wide average, as opposed to - 5 years below the s t a t e i n 1970.

35

c ECONOMIC -D EVE LOPME NT An a n a l y s i s of income and i t s d i s t r i b u t i o n is important f o r four major reasons:

F i r s t, income reflects t h e v i t a l i t y of t h e county's economic growth and development.

Second, income r e f l e c t s t h e a b i l i t y of t h e community t o a f -

ford needed services and facilities.

Third, income determines t h e p o t e n t i a l for l o c a l capital investment and i n f l u e n c e s t h e demand f o r goods and services; and f i n a l l y, income d i r e c t l y reflects education l e v e l s and kk+e a b i l i t y t o af-f o r d adequate p r i v a t e l y financed housing.

INCOME Tables 111-7 t h r u 111-11 show a comparison of income d i s t r i b u t i o n from 1970 and 1980 i n Limestone County, A l a b a m a, and t h e U.S.A.

While a l l c a t e g o r i e s are n o t comparable for t h e p e r i o d due t o Census Category changes, two d i s t i n c t trend f a c t s are observable f o r t h e four broad income c a t e g o r i e s, 0-$4,999, 0-$9,999, 0-$14,999, and 0-$25,000.

F i s t, d e s p i t e t h e s e m i a f f l u e n t " r u r a l suburbs" surrounding t h e C i t y of Athens, " r u r a l " Limestone County* has an income d i s t r i b u t i o n denoting less a f f l u e n c e (by t h e s e major income groups.) See Table 111-7 ) than t h e statewide average; and secondly, from 1970 t o 1980, t h e a c t u a l i n c r e a s e i n f a m i l i e s earning m o r e than $25,000 w a s less than t h e statewide aver-age on both an a b s o l u t e and relative change percentage basis.

This reflects t h e decrease i n high pay aerospace jobs i n Huntsville and a lack of p r i v a t e s e c t o r job growth a t comparable pay levels i n Limestone County and t h e f l u c t u a t i n g s t a t u s of t h e GM workforce.

I N C O M E T R E N D S I n comparison with t h e statewide average, Limestone County's 1970 median family income f i g u r e of $6,820 ranked 19th and w a s 93.9 p e r c e n t of t h e state median income.

This r e l a t i v e l y high median family income r e f l e c t e d t h e county's dependence i n t h e Huntsville SMSA which ranked h i g h e s t i n income i n t h e S t a t e ' s metropolitan areas.

By 1980 t h e countywide median family income had grown by 139.5 percent t o

$16,303, and r i s e n from 93.9 p e r c e n t of t h e state median t o 99.7 percent.

The 139.5 p e r c e n t growth rate was s i g n i f i c a n t l y above both t h e State and U.S.A.

in-creases of 125.1 and 107.6 p e r c e n t, r e s p e c t i v e l y.

A s i g n i f i c a n t measure of t h i s family income growth took p l a c e i n " r u r a l "

Limestone County, as can be noted by t h e f a c t t h a t Athens' r e l a t i v e growth w a s only 118.9 p e r c e n t and t h a t t h e C i t y a c t u a l l y l o s t p r o p o r t i o n a l ground a g a i n s t t h e State median family income from 1970 when they w e r e 111.6 p e r c e n t t o 1980 when t h e i r median w a s only 108.5 p e r c e n t of t h e s t a t e f i g u r e s.

These statistics are r e f l e c t i v e of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e proportion of 2 o r more family m e m b e r s working i n Limestone County is above t h e State average, and has increased dramatically s i n c e t h e 1970 Census; and, t h e f a c t t h a t even

• Limestone County minus t h e C i t y of Athens.

I 1

I 1

I I

I 1

1 I

I I

I 1

I I

1 I

I 36

TABLE 111-7 I

INCOME D I S T R I B U T I O N BY FAMILY, LIMESTONE COUNTY, TARCOG REGION AND ALABAMA, 1979 I N C O M E / 1 9 8 0 CENSUS R u r a 1 LIMESTONE (TOTAL)

A t h e n s L i m e s t o n e TARCOG A l a b a m a N o.

% Total N o.

% T o t a l N o.

% T o t a l N o.

% Total N o.

% Total Total F a m i l i e s L e s s t h a n $2, 500

$2,500 t o $4,999

$5,000 t o $7,499

$7,500 t o $9,999

$10,000 t o $12,499

$12,500 t o $14,999

$15,000 to $17,499

$17,500 to $19,999 w

$20,000 t o $22,499

$22,500 t o $24,999

$25,000 t o $27,499

$27,500 t o $29,999

$30,000 to $34,999

$35,000 t o $39,999

$40,000 t o $49,999

$50,000 t o $74 999

$75,000 or m o r e Median M e a n 4

12, 639 100.0 426 3.4 954 7.5 1, 014 8.0 1,044 8.3 1, 178 9.3 1, 141 9.0 1, 079 8.5 981 7.8 1, 011 8.0 763 6.0 603 4.8 421 3.3 731 5.8 406 3.2 474 3.8 311 2.5 102

.8

$16,303

$18,821 4, 065 100.0 8, 574 100.0 117 2.9 309 3.6 291 7.2 663 7.7 3 56 8.8 658 7.7 3 03 7.5 741 8.6 310 7.6 868 10.1 3 67 9.0 774 9.0 258 6.3 821 9.6 305 7.5 676 7.9 233 5.7 778 9.1 277 6.8 486 5.7 247 6.1 356 4.2 168 4.1 253 3.0 279 6.9 452 5.3 137 3.4 269 3.1 240 5.9 234 2.7 145 3.6 166 1.9 32

.8 70

.8

$17, 750 NA

$20, 446 NA 114, 941 100.0 1, 042,571 4,063 3.5 46, 342 7, 551 6.6 72, 708 9, 610 8.4 90, 327 9,473 8.2 89, 322 10, 576 9.2 95, 018 9,170 8.0 80, 568 9, 858 8.6 86, 852 8,426 7.3 75,833 8, 241 7.2 77, 006 6, 085 5.3 56, 469 4,564 4.0 41, 831 6,992 6.1 62, 908 38, 361 4,864 4.2 5,111 4.4 35,659 3, 149 2.7 22, 928 928

.8 10, 864

$16, 825

$16, 353

$19, 800

$19, 249 6,280 5.5 59, 575 100.0 4.4 7.0 8.7 8.6 9.1 7.7 8.3 7.3 7.4 5.7 5.4 4.0 6.0 3.7 3.4 2.2 1.0 SOURCE:

U.S. C e n s u s of Population and H o u s i n g, 1980. S u m m a r y Tape F i l e 3A, 1982.

c TABLE 111-8 FAMILY INCOME-1970 LIMESTONE COUNTY, CITY OF ATHENS Total Limestone Cty.

City of Athens "Rural Limestone" -

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent All Familics Under $1,000

$1,000-52.999

$3,000-54.999 S5.000-56,999

$1,000-$9,999 510.000-514.999 S15,000-$24,999 525,000 +

10,642 423 1,648 1,666 1,748 2,157 714 2, 088 218 100.0 4.0 15.5 15.5 16.5 20.3 19.5 6.7 2.0 3,712 151 387 523 5 6 3 884 185 161 658 100.0 4.0 10.3 14.0 15.2 17.1 23.8 10.4 4.3 6,930 272 1,264 1,143 1.185 1,449 1,204 329 57 100.0 3.9 18.2 16.5 11.1 21.6 17.4 4.7

. 8

~~

~~~~~

~

SOlJRCE: U.S. Census of Population, 1970.

FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION LIMESTONE, RL4BAMA USA PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION CHANGE BY INCOME RANGES, 1970 AND 1980 1910 1980 1910 1980 1910 1980 1970 1980 Total

' I Rura 1 I'

Limestone

- Limestone Percent W/Incorne L e s s Than $5,000 35.0 28.3 38.6 10.9 10.1 11.3 Percent W/Income Less lhan j10,OOO 71.8 61.2 17.3 21.2 26.4 21.6 Percent W/Income Less Than $15.000 91.3 85.0 94.7 45.5 43.0 46.1 Percent W/Incomr Les5 Than $25,300

98. 0 95.4 99.4 75.8 69.3 19.0 Alabama 32.6 11.4 68.2 20.7 88.1 45.5 91.6 74.2 USA -

19.1 7.0 50.9 20.6 77.1 36.2 95.4 65.6 SOURCE: U.S. Census, 1970 and 1980 38 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

i I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

1 I

1 I

1 I

I I

I TABLE 111-10 MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME 1970-1980 TARCOG, ALABAMA AND THE U.S.A.

1970 1980 P e r c e n t of P e r c e n t of Dollar Value D o l l a r S t a t e Dollar S t a t e P e r c e n t Chang Value Median Value Median 1978-80 D e K a l b

$ 5,316 J a c k s o n

$ 6,372 Limestone

$ 6,820 Madison

$10, 439 M a r s h a l l

$ 6,596 TARCOG

$ 7,950 Alabama

$ 7,266 USA

$ 9,590

~~

~

~~~

73.2 87.7 93.9 143.7 90.8 109.4 100.0 132.0

~

~~

$13,901

$15,706

$16,303

$19,350

$14,754

$16,825

$16, 353

$19,908 85.0 96.0 99.7 118.3 90.2 102.9 100.0 121.7 161.5 146.5 139.5 85.4 123.7 111.6 125.1 107.6 SOURCE:

U.S. Census of P o p u l a t i o n and H o u s i n g, 1980 Summary Tape F i l e 3A, 1982. a n d U.S.

Census of P o p u l a t i o n and Housing, 1970.

T A R C O G 39

TABLE 111-11 TARCCG REGION PER CAPITA INCOME, 1972, 1974, 1975, 1 9 1 1, and 1979 (1980 Census)

P e r C a p i t a Income ALABAMA OEKALB COUNTY C c l l i n s v i l l e C r o s s v i l l e F o r t Payne F y f f e G e r a l d i n e Hanumndville Henager I d e r Lakeview Mentone Powell C r o s s r o a d s R a i n s v i l l e S h i l o S y l v a n i a V a l l e y Head JACKSON COUNTY B r i d g e p o r t Dutton Hollywood P a i n t Rock P i s q a h s c o t t s b o r o S e c t i o n S t e v e n s o n Woodville LIMESTONE COUNTY Ardmore Athens Elkmcnt L e s t e r M o o r e s v i l l e MADISON COUNTY G u r l e y H u n t s v i l l e Madison N e w Hope Owens Cross Roads T r l a n a MARSHALL COUNTY A l b e r t v i l l e Arab Boaz Douglas G r a n t G u n t e r s v i l l e Union Grove UNITES STATES 1972

$2,974 2.320.

2.554' 2,590.

3,099 2,542' 3,039 2,335' 2,415' 2,400' 2.364' 2,589.

2,144' 2,513' 1,596' 2, 1 9 5 +

2.618'

$2,676' 2,485' 2, 7 5 1 2,248' 2,365' 2, 9 8 3 3.483 3,307 2,683*

3,529

$2.681' 2,666' 3.271 3.832 2,518' 3,496

$ 3, 8 4 0 2,887' 4, 2 2 5 3,629 3,239 2,160' 1,440'

$2.794' 3,097 3, 4 2 5 2.702' 3,021 3,262 2,714'

$3,781 1974 -

$3,629 2.842.

3,072' 3,102' 3,794 3,184' 3,817 2,926' 3.011' 3,007' 2,961' 3,007.

2.675 3.189' 2,000' 2,750' 3,271'

$3,358' 3.170.

3,806 3,029*

3,437' 3,837 4,305 3, 6 4 1 3,602' 4, 5 3 9

$3,263' 3.488' 4, 0 0 8 3,984 3,288' 4, 5 6 5

$ 4, 5 1 7 3,808 4, 9 9 7 3,984 3,956 2,849' 1,,901*

$3,359' 3,650 4.156 3.225' 3,654 3,912 3,313' 1975 -

$ 3, 8 9 9 3.021' 3.246' 3,330*

3,947 3.5479 3, 9 0 8 3.101' 3,173' 3,187' 3.139' 2,935' 2,820' 3.433.

2,120' 2,856' 3,458'

$3,551 3.356' 3, 9 0 1 3,341' 3,553' 3, 9 5 8 4, 5 9 1 4,014 3.674' 4, 6 9 3

$3,477+

3.735' 4, 2 6 7 4, 1 1 1 3.504' 4,866

$4,780 4,027 5,265 4, 1 9 8 4,220 2,968' 3,008.

$3,598.1 3.863' 4.450 3,434' 3, 8 9 7 4, 2 5 3 3,533' 1917

$4,712 3.761' 3,871' 3.787' 4, 7 8 6 4.456' 5,013 3,781' 3.877' 3, 8 8 6

• 3.827.

3,724' 3.445.

4,299.

2.584" 3,453' 4.221.

$4,489' 4.179.

4,601' 4,325' 4,387' 4, 8 8 6 5.859 4, 9 0 8 4,632' 5, 1 9 3

$4,300' 4,612*

5, 3 0 7 5,087 4,338' 5, 0 2 3

$ 5, 6 5 5 4, 8 5 8 6, 1 4 5 4, 9 0 0 5, 2 9 9 3.758' 2.423'

$4.392' 4, 7 2 1 5, 2 9 2 4,134' 4, 7 2 8 5,040 4,286*

( c e n s u s 1980) 1979 S 5,908 5.294' 4.511.

4.403.

6, 0 4 3 5,000*

5,626.

5,688.

5.096.

5,188' 5,520.

5,348.

8, 3 1 0 5.502.

5,598' 5.003' 5.086.

S 5.452.

5,148*

5.294.

5,059' 4.558.

5,174*

6,697 4.982' 5,355' 5,719.

5 5.645' 4,655' 6,397 5, 1 5 4

• 4,669' 1 3, 6 1 7

$ 7,050 4,806.

7, 6 6 1 7,630 5.461' 4,776' 2,524'

$ 5.439' 5,652' 6, 5 0 3 5.262' 4.594.

6,926 5,899' 4,406' 7, 3 7 1

'Below S t a t e Average SOURCE:

U.S.

Department o f Commerce, Bureau of t h e Census, C u r r e n t P o p u l a t i o n R e p o r t s,

" P o p u l a t i o n E s t i m a t e s and P r o j e c t i o n s " ( S e r i e s P-25) 1977, 1979, and 1980 and U.S. C e n s u s, 1'380. ( R e v i s e d, TARCOG 5/83) 3-W 0

0 n

1 40 I i 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 E-1 1

1 1

I I

I I

1 1

I I

1 I

1 I

I I

I I

I I

I i n 1980, almost 30 percent of a l l personal wage and s a l a r y income and 38 per-cent of a l l County r e s i d e n t s jobs are derived outside Limestone County.

I N C O M E L E V E L Income l e v e l s i n both Limestone County and the TARCOG Region have t r a d i -

t i o n a l l y been below S t a t e and National Averages.

In 1970 the per c a p i t a income i n Limestone County w a s 85.6 percent of the S t a t e f i g u r e and 63.0 percent of the United S t a t e s ; however, by 1980 the percentage had r i s e n only t o 85.9 percent of the state and 67.1 percent of the national f i g u r e.

This i n d i c a t e s t h a t the Limestone County growth rate of 157 percent i n per c a p i t a income, while it exceeded the national average, w a s not s i g n i f i c a n t l y above the Alabama average.

Most of the slow down i n growth income i n Limestone County occurred from 1979 through 1983.

Only the 1979-80 per capita growth r a t e of 5.3 percent w a s below the State o r national average f o r the e n t i r e period 1975-80.

P O V E R T Y S T A T U S According t o the 1970 Census, 2,300 o r 21.7 percent of the families i n Limestone County had income less than the poverty l e v e l. "

This f i g u r e w a s s l i g h t l y above t h e s t a t e average of 20.7 percent and over twice the U. S. aver-age of 10.7 percent.

By the 1980 Census, t h e Limestone figure had dropped t o 1 7 7 1 families, or 14.01 percent of a l l f a m i l i e s, j u s t below the s t a t e index of 14.8 percent and only about 50 percent above t h e U.S. average of 9.58 percent of a l l families below poverty l e v e l.

The 1980 d i s t r i b u t i o n of t o t a l poverty level persons by age and race is shown i n T a b l e s 111-12and 111-14.

The county-wide poverty l e v e l of 31.77 percent f o r Blacks w a s s i g n i f i c a n t l y below the state r a t e of 38.51 percent, and only s l i g h t l y above t h e national average of 29.84 percent.

is factured out of the county-wide f i g u r e s, a "rural" below poverty r a t e of 28.62 percent f o r Blacks i s revealed, which while higher than e i t h e r the county, s t a t e o r national poverty f i g u r e f o r t o t a l ( a l l races) persons, w a s below even the national poverty rate f o r Blacks.

When the City of Athens On an age b a s i s, t h e poverty indicators f o r Limestone County are about the same f o r both Athens and t h e " r u r a l county" remainder.

About 16.8 percent of a l l persons i n the county have incomes "below poverty" with the l a r g e s t propor-t i o n a l concentration (35.7 percent) being those 65 and over.

These figures are below the state average of 18.88 percent of t o t a l persons, b u t above the state age 65+ average of 28.38 percent.

This indicates t h a t the "elderly/retired" population i n Limestone County is p a r t i a l l y "trapped" by fixed income type finances

• This s t a t u s, based on Bureau of the Census d e f i n i t i o n originated by Social Security Administration, provides a range of poverty income c u t o f f s adjusted by such f a c t o r s as family s i z e, sex of the family head, number of children under 18 years of age, and farm and non-farm residence.

4 1

TABLE 111-12 POVERTY INDICATORS, TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS I BY TYPE, 1980 CENSUS Povertv Levels Households T o t a l B e l o w 100%

B e l o w 125%

k Households No.

N o.

DeKalb Jackson L i m e s t o n e Mad is on Marshall TARCOG SMSA Alabama 19,324 4,432 22.94 17,560 3,276 18.66 15,328 2,954 19.27 67,450 9,254 13.72 23,591 4,668 19.79 143,253 24,584 17.16 106,369 16,876 1 5. 8 7 1,342,369 264,009 19.67 5, 8 7 1 30.38 4,542 25.87 3,942 25.72 12,614 18.70 6,443 27.31 33,412 23.27 22,999 21.62 350,280 26.09

~~~~~

~

1 Households = F a m i l i e s + non-family householders SOURCE:

U. S. Census, 1980, Census of P o p u l a t i o n and Housiiq, Summary Tape F i l e 3A, produced by t h e c e n t e r for B u s i n e s s and Economic Research, The U n i v e r s i t y of A l a b a m a, 1982.

I I

1 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 B

42 2

1 I

1 I

TABLE 111-15 LIMESTONE COUNTY WORK FORCE 1960-1970-1980 1

EmFloyed A g r i c u l t u r e, F o r e s t r y,

F i s h e r i e s a n d M i n i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n

!-fa nu f ac t u r i ng T r a n s p o r t a t i o n, Cormnunic IP W

% Change

% Change 1 9 6 0 1 9 7 0 1 9 8 0 1 9 6 0 - 70 1970 - 80 1 1, 2 8 1 1 4, 6 5 3 1 7, 6 7 9

+ 2 9. 8

+20.7 2, 817 1, 4 2 5 9 1 9

-49.4 1, 116 1, 3 2 2 1, 2 8 0

+18.4 2, 3 0 4 3, 8 3 6 6, 0 1 1

+66.5

-35.5

- 3.2

+ 5 6. 7 461 951 777

+ 1 0 6. 3

- 1 8. 3 1, 7 8 4 2, 522 3, 0 3 2

+ 4 3. 2

+20.2 2, 0 2 7 3, 2 2 1 3, 5 7 9

+ 56.4 t11.1

i o n s,

a n d P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s W h o l e s a l e a n d R e t a i l T r a d e F i n a n c e, I n s u r a n c e and Real L:stnte Scrvlccs 4 34 1, 0 3 7 1, 6 2 2

+103.0

+56.4

,c)vc 1-nmcnt

~~

NOTE: This data is by place cf r e s i d e n c e of w o r k e r s, n o t by jobs i n L i m e s t o n e County.

SOURCE:

1 9 6 0, 1 9 7 0 a n d 1 9 8 0 U.S. C e n s u s of P o p u l a t i o n

TABLE 111-13 POVERTY STATUS 1979/80 BY AGE FOR PERSONS TABLE 111-14 PERSONS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL BY RACE LIHESTONE COUNTY AND THE STATE OF ALABAMA 1980

.~____

Limestone Limestone Athens Limestone TARCOG Alabama Age T o t a l C i t y "Rural" T o t a l Under 55 55 t h r u 59 6 0 t h r u 64 65 and o v e r T o t a l U r i d c r 5 5 6 0 t h r u 64 65 and over 5q thKU 5 9 Total Under 55 55 t h r u 59 6 0 t h r u 64 6 5 and o v c r (TOTAL PERSONS')

45,514 1 4, 1 6 1 3 1, 3 4 1 36.797 1 0, 8 4 0 2 5, 9 5 1 2,038 834 1, 2 0 4 1,980 614 1, 3 0 6 4. 6 9 9 i. a i 9 2, 8 8 0 (PEEONS BEMW WVERTY LEVEL) 1, 6 7 2 2,386 5, 2 8 6 269 139 1 3 0 5, 3 5 6 1, 5 1 8 3,838 369 1 4 1 228 1, 6 7 8 588 1, 0 9 0 (PERCENTAGE OF PERSONS BELOW PGVERTY LEVEL) 16.86 16.84 1 6. 8 6 14.56 1 4. 0 0 1 4. 7 9 18.64 20.92 11.50 1 3. 2 0 16.61 10.80 35.71 32.35 3 1. 8 5 406,524 322,803 1 9, 4 6 0 16.296 37,945 6 3. 3 5 2 45.005 2, 6 9 1 3,291 ii,685 1 5. 5 8 1 3. 1 3 1 3. 8 3 2 0. 2 0 3 0. 7 ' )

1, 8 1 3, 0 1 4 1, 0 3 3, 3 1 0 1 8 8, 7 9 1 169,033 4 2 1, 8 8 0 719,165 541.14B 27,674 3 1, 2 1 6 1 1 9, 7 1 7 I I l. O R 17.04 1 4. 6 6 1 8. 4 7

-28. 38

_ _ _ _ _ ~. ~ _ _ _

T o t a l p e r s o n s c o u n t e d for income/poverty e v a l u a t i o n, n o t Ett p e r s o n s.

SOUHCE: -

9. S. Census of P o p u l a t ~ o n a n d IiOUslng, 1980.

Summary Tap? Vile 3 A.. 1982 T o t a l P e r s o n s (No)

White B l a c k O t h e r T o t a l P e r s o n s B e l o w POVCKty LCVCl

( N O )

White B l a c k O t h c r a of P c r s o n 5 B e l o w Poverty L C V C l T o t a l White Black O t h c r Limestone rota1 45,514 38.796 6, 5 2 5 193 7.719 5, 6 2 1 2, 0 7 3 1 9 16.96 1 4. 5 0 3 1. 1 1 9.84 A t h e n s C i t y 1 4, 1 6 7 1 1, 7 1 5 2, 4 0 2 50 2, 3R6 1, 4 9 3 89 3 7

1 6. 8 4 12.14 1 7. 1 8 0

Limestone "Ru r a 1 I'

3 1, 3 4 1 2 7, 0 8 1 4, 1 2 3 1 4 3 5, 3 3 3 4.134 1, 1 8 0 1 9 11.01 1 5. 2 1 28.62 1 3. 2 9 Alabama I s t a t e l 3, 8 1 3, 0 1 4 2,818,570 9 7 1, 4 3 6 2 3, 0 0 0 719, 765 3 4 0, 9 6 7 3 7 4, 0 9 8 4, 7 0 0 18.88 1 2. 1 0

38. 5 1 2 0. 4 3 SOURCE:

U. S. CENSUS, 1980. Summary Tape F i l e 3A.

which have not kept pace with the rising economy in the rest of the county in-come sectors. Nationally, Limestone County exceeds both the total persons poverty level rate of 12.40 percent and the age 65+ group rate of 14.83 percent, indicating the efforts of both low/moderate wage levels and retirement benefits from such industries.

EMPLOYMENT / W O R K F O RCE As with other areas in the Southeast, Limestone County's economy is still in a state of growth and transition. Long dependent on agriculture as its economic base, the county has moved from an agriculturally-oriented economy to one of manufacturing and services. Limestone County is not as well developed in this transition as is the Southeast as a whole, or many of its neighboring large urban areas; however, the shift is occurring and has significance in re-lation to the countyls future in terms of economic development.

Limestone County's economic growth has been both aided and deterred by many factors. On one hand the early 1960's aerospace/Eefense economic growth in nearby Huntsville, the location of the Brown's Ferry Nuclear Plant in the County in the 1 9 7 0 ' ~ ~

and the selection of Limestone or a General Motors plant, all injected significant numbers of high paying jobs into the Lvea.

At the same time, however, the aerospace/defense development also retarded (and often precluded) significant wholesale, retail and financial sector growth in the county due to strong established competition in Huntsville and Decatur and the fact that these markets were able to &sorb immediate growth and had the established infrastructures and financial base to develop additional capacity quickly. By the same token, the Brown's Ferry comtruction impact was only tem-porary in nature, but the county was forced to absorb a significant cost in public services and facilities to serve the work force due to both local and federal errors in establishing proper mitigation cDst indexes to apply for federal (TVA) impact funds.

Current major industrial growth in the coanty has centered around either high-wage national/international market goods such as automotive parts and ae-cessories and machinery and metal parts, which have experienced severe employ-ment fluctuations due to market conditions and changes in consumer patterns.

The remaining growth areas of the Limestone County economy, agribusiness/services, food processing and textiles/apparel are traditiorally slow growth and low/moder-ate pay employment, which, while they aid grov:h in the long run, are normally not sufficient to allow for "catch-up" growth zo offset previous slow economic development.

The purpose of this section of the report is to look at the economy in de-tail, determine its strengths and weaknesses, and identify potentials for future growth. Various aspects of the economy which togekher have made the county's economy what it is will be analyzed, including manufacturing, retail and whole-sale trades, services, and agriculture. A l s o, included in this analysis will be general features of the economy and characteristics of the labor force.

44

TABLE 111-16 TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE BY MAJOR SECTOR, ANNUAL AVERP.GES,1 1970-1975 LIMESTONE COUNTY, ALABAMA 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 IP m

-4 s e r v i c e 4 900 8 00 800 900 800 800 n

9 Governments 4, 1 0 0 4, 300 4, 4 0 0 4, 200 4, 2 0 0 4, 200 F e d e r a l 104 107 105 1 2 1 1 2 8 2, 3 3 0

D 0

S t a t e & Local 3, 996 4, 1 9 3 4, 295 4, 0 7 9 4,072 1, 8 7 0 c,

AGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT^

1, 8 0 0 1, 7 0 0 1, 5 0 0 1,400 1, 4 0 0 1, 300

= = = m m m m = = m = = = m m ~ = ~

TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE^

Total Unemployment

( R a t e - % )

T o t a l m p l o y m e n t NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT Wage E,

s a l a r y 3 o

Manufacturing Curable Goods F a b r i c a t e d Metals Machinery ( I n c. E l e c t. )

"Other" Durable Goods Food & Kindred Prod.

T e x t i l e s & Apparel P a p e r, P r i n t. & Pub.

" 0 t h e r "

o Nonmanufacturinq C o n s t r u c t i o n T r a n s. Comm.

& Pub. U t i l.

Wholesale & Retail Trade F i n. I n s., and R e a l Es.

Nondurable Goods 16,600 1,050 15,550 6.3%

8, 4 0 0 1, 500 4 00 NA NA 4 00 1, 100 700 4 00

-D-O 6, 9 0 0 4 00 100 1, 300 1 0 0 17, 000 930 5.5%

1 6, 0 7 0 8, 8 0 0 1, 7 0 0 500 NA NA 5 00 1, 2 0 0 7 00 4 00 100 0

7, 1 0 0 4 00 100 1, 400 100 1 7, 070 780 4. 6 %

16,290 9, 3 0 0 2, 100 7 00 NA NA 7 00

1., 400 800 5 00 100 0

7, 200 4 00 100 1, 400 100 1 6, 7 0 0 830 5.0%

1 5, 8 7 0 9, 4 0 0 2, 2 0 0 600 NA 100 500 1, 6 0 0 8 00 700 100 0

7, 2 0 0 3 00 100 1,600 100 1 6, 9 8 0 1, 060 1 5, 3 2 0 6. 3 %

9, 4 0 0 2,300 600 NA 100 500 1, 7 0 0 900 700 100 0

7, 1 3 0 3 00 100 1, 6 3 0 100 1 7, 2 1 0 1, 4 0 0 15, 810 8. 2 %

9, 300 2, 1 0 0 600 NA 100 500 1,500 8 00 7 00 0

0 7, 200 400 100 1, 6 0 0 100

TABLE 111-17 TOTAL C I V I L I A N LABOR FORCE BY MAJOR SECTOR, ANNUAL AVERAGESt1 1976-1981 LIMESTONE COUNTY, ALABAMA 1976 1977 1978 1979 198Q 1981 f

17,740 18,480 19,710 20,510 20,890 21,440 1, 310 1,450 1, 310 1, 560 2, 160 2,450 16,430 17, 030 18,400 18, 950 18, 730 18,990 7.4%

7.8%

6.6%

7.6%

10.3%

1 1. 4 %

a 4

10,340 3,050 1

I 530 250 51 0 770 1,520 740 710 4 0 30 7, 2 3 0 350 80 1,770 18 0 710 4,200 2,070 2,130 1, 560 TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE^

Total Unemployment Total Employment (Rate- %)

NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT Wage.S s a l a r y 3 o

Manufacturing Durable Goods Fabricated Metals Machinery ( I n. E l e c t )

"0 the r " Durable Good s Food & K i n d r e d Pro.

T e x t i l e s & Apparel Paper, Print. & Pub.

"0 t h er 'I Construct on Trans. Comm. & Pub. r l t i l.

Wholcsalc & Ilctaj 1 Trade F i n. Ins., and Real E s.

Service 4 Nondurable Goods o NonmaiiufdcLur 11%

-l Governrnants 11,120 3,740 2, 110 290 600 1,220 1,630 720 820 4 0 100 7, 3uo 410 z 00 1, 340 190 880 3,860 1,380 2,400 1,120 1 2, 070 4,250 2,560

-D-

- D-

-D-1, 690 8 2 0 820

-D-50 7, [I20 500 100 1, 930 220 94 0 4,030 1, 550 2,400 1,120 12,610 4, 680 2, 950

- D-

-D-

- D-1,730 87 0 810

- D-60 7, 930 510 120 1, 940 220 880 4, 260 1,780 2,400 1,110 12,670 4,460 2,810

- D-

-D-

-D-1,650 8 90 710

-D-180 t1,210 4 2 0 140 1, 300 220 8 4 0 4,690 2, 100 2,530 1, 090 13,410 4,560 3,040

- D-

- D-

- D-1, 520 820 61 0

-D-90 0,05u 1110 130 2, 000 220 960 5,130 2, 560 2, 5 7 0 1,070

TABLE 111-18 TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE BY MAJOR SECTOR (ANNUAL AVERAGES 1970, 1975, 1980, LIMESTONE COUNTY, ALABAMA PERCENT CHANGE TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE T o t a l Unemployment T o t a l Employment

( R a t e % )

NONAGFUCULTURAL EMPLOYMENT Percentage Change 1970 1975 1980 1970-75 1975-80 Wage & S a l a r y o Manufacturing Durable Goods F a b r i c a t e d Metals Machinery ( I n c. E l e c t. )

"Other" Durable Goods Food & Kindred Prod.

T e x t i l e s & Apparel Paper, P r i n t. & Pub.

I' 0 t h e r Nondurable Goods o Nonmanufacturins Construction Trans. C o r n. & Pub. U t i l.

Wholesale & R e t a i l Trade F i n. I n s., and R e a l Es.

S e r v i c e Government F e d e r a l S t a t e & Local AG-=CULTURAL EMPLOYMENT 1 6, 600 1, 050 6.3%

1 5, 550 8,400 1, 500 400 NA NA 400 7 00 400

- D-O 6 I 900 400 100 1,300 100 900 4 I 100 NA NA 1, 800 1,100 17, 210 1, 400 8.2%

15,810 9,300 2 100 600 NA 100 500 1, 500 800 700 0

0 7 I 200 400 100 1, 600 100 800 4,200 2,330 1,870 1,300 20, 890 2, 160 10.3%

18,730 1 2 I 670 4,460

- D-

-D-

-D-1,560 890 7 1 0

- D-180 8, 210 420 140 1, 900 220 840 4, 690 2, 1 0 0 2, 590 1, 090 2, a10 3.7 33.3 1.7 10.7 40.0 50.0 25.0 36.4 14.3 42.9 4.3 0

0 23.1 0

-11.1 2.4 NA NA

-27.8 21.4 54.3 18.5 36.2 112.4 368.3 10.0 11.3 1.4 14.0 5.0 40.0 18.8 120.0 5.0 11.7

-9.9 38.5

-16.2

1

-, r ? P -

P P

2 N

7 0

ir 0

E Y

O z

TABLE 111-20 TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE BY C W O R SECTOR, iu;:JAL ALXFAV\\GES. PERCENT CHANGE 1980-82 LIMESTONE COUNTY, ALABFL"2.

1980-62 Pc-rcenr

!982 Chacoe 1980 20,890 2, 1 6 0 10.3%

18.73C Zi.750 3.110 1 3. i I?, 64C 8. 3 4 4. n TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE' T o t a l Unemployment (Rate-%)

T o t a l Employment NONAGRICUZTURAL EHPLOYHENT Wage 6 S a l a r y '

M a n u f a c t u r i n g D u r a b l e Goods F a b r i c a t e d Metals Machinery ( I n c. E l e c t. )

" O t h e r " Durable Goods Food 6 Kindred Prod.

T e x t i l e s 6 A p p a r e l P a p e r, P r i n t. 6 Pub.

"Other" C o n s t r u c t i o n T r a n s. Comm. 6 Pub. mil.

w h o l e s a l e 6 Retail T r a d e F i n. I n s., and Real E s t.

s e r v i c e 4 Government 5 F e d e r a l S t a t e 6 Local AGRICULTURAL EEIPLOYMENT~

Nondurable Goods N o m a n u f a c t u r i n g J. '3 1 2. 6 7 C 4, 4 6 0 2,810

-D-

-D-1.650 890 710

-D-1 8 0 420 140 1, 9 0 0 2 2 0 840 4,690 2.100 2,590 1, 0 9 0 a,izo I 3, i 3 C 4, 5 4 0 2, 3 6 0

- D-

- D-

,sac 350 700

-D-30 5.090 370 I 1 0 2,000 220 940 5,.lr) 2, 4 7 0 4. 4 1.8 5. 3

- 4. 2

- 4. 5

-1.4

- 5 3. 3 5. E

-11.9

- 7. 1 5. 3 0

1 1. 9 7. 2 1 7. 6

, -'5%>

I 49

c One measure of the economic base of an area i s the summation of a l l employ-ment opportunities a v a i l a b l e t o t h e residents of t h a t area and t o commuters from nearby areas.

The p o t e n t i a l of an area f o r economic growth is limited by its a b i l i t y t o create employment opportunities for its people and t o a t t r a c t new people.

Tables 111-15 t h r u 111-20 show the changes i n t o t a l employment by industry f o r the period 1970-1980 by both place of residence and place of work d e f i n i t i o n.

During t h i s decade, t h e t o t a l c i v i l i a n workforce ( a l l those people able t o, and desiring work) rose by 25.8 percent, while t o t a l employment rose by 20.5 percent.

This figure r e f l e c t s a l l Limestone County residents, no matter where they a c t u a l l y worked."

Table 111-18 shows t h a t manufacturing and government were the main growth areas of r e s i d e n t employment.

The f a c t t h a t the t o t a l c i v i l i a n workforce rose a t a higher rate than t o t a l emplo.yment is indicative of both a decline i n job a v a i l a b i l i t y and t h e f a c t t h a t proportionally more women and normally "retired" e l d e r l y persons w e r e forced i n t o t h e market due t o economic pressures.

I n the county, from 1970-1980, the t o t a l nunber of jobs (employment) created rose by 50.8 percent with manufacturing and wholesale and r e t a i l trades creating the l a r g e s t proportional job impacts (see t a b l e s 111-16 and 111-17.)

In 1970 54.0 percent of a l l persons l i v i n g i n Limestone Count;r could f i n d work ( i n theory) i n Limestone County; t h a t is, t h e r e w e r e enough t o t a l jobs f o r 8,400 persons of the 15,550 working employed persons l i v i n g i n the county (discounting the number of jobs i n Limestone County which w e r e actually held by residents of areas out-s i d e the county.) This "job gap" of 7,158 jobs represented the need f o r Limestone County residents t o commute (or eventually out-nigrate) t o find work.

By 1980, there were 67.6 percent as many jobs i n Limest0r.e County a s there w e r e r e s i d e n t s employed, indicating s u b s t a n t i a l improvement i n local job opportunity but s t i l l need f o r more jobs t o s t a b i l i z e r e s i d e n t employrent based out-migration tendencies.

This work/job commuting need is borne out by the f a c t t h a t i n 1980, accord-ing t o the U.S. Census, 86.3 percent of a l l jobs i n Limestone County w e r e held by Limestone County r e s i d e n t s, but 38 percent of a l l Limestone County residents work outside Limestone County (Madison and Morga County account f o r about 80 percent of a l l job out-commuting from Limestone County.)

WORKFORCE 'TRENDS The t o t a l number of persons l i v i n g i n Limeszone County increased from 41,699 i n 1970 t o 46,005 i n 1980, t h i s w a s an increase of 10.3 percent.

Major changes i n the proportions of these persons employed, ax6 t h e i r employment within the major sectors of the economy have occurred dur1T.q the last decade.

Tables 111-18 t h r u 111-19 indicate some of the t r a n s i t i o n s mace daring t h i s decade.

• As defined as "workforce" e l i g i b l e (not including students disabled persons and persons not a c t i v e l y seeking work) 50

Recent advances i n technology have had a g r e a t impact on a g r i c u l t u r a l and manufacturing employment.

ductive and are furnishing t h e n a t i o n ' s higher l e v e l s of personal income and increased l e i s u r e t h a t i n t u r n have placed a higher demand throughout the nation on a l l types of services r e s u l t i n g i n increased employment and higher proportion of employment i n t h e services sector of the economy.

These s e c t o r s of the economy have become more pro-LABOR 'FORCE COMPOSITION The make up of both t h e e x i s t i n g and p o t e n t i a l labor force can be one cf the g r e a t e s t assets or l i a b i l i t i e s t h e community can possess.

tics of the people who make up t h e labor force and t h e s k i l l s which they possess s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t any area's p o t e n t i a l f o r i n d u s t r i a l development.

More-over, the labor force, primarily, determines the q u a l i t y of i n d u s t r i e s which l o c a t e i n an area.

The chracteris-Employment S t a t u s of Population--Of the t o t a l population 16 years old z?C over, i n Limestone County 19,384 o r 58.0 percent, were i n the labor force ir, 1980.

Of the t o t a l female population, approximately 56 percent were worlcinc women.

Among males, 73.2 percent w e r e i n the labor force.

This represents a s i g n i f i c a n t t r a n s i t i o n from the 1970 perio6 when t o t a l labor force p a r t i c i p a t i o n rate w a s 54.6 percent with under 33 percent p a r t i c i -

pation by women and a p a r t i c i p a t i o n rate of over 76 percent f o r males.

It in-d i c a t e s a rise i n female oriented employment i n the county combineci with economic pressures t o cause m o r e women t o enter the labor force and a small l o s s i n male labor force p a r t i c i p a t i o n.

On a state and n a t i o n a l comparison basis, the 1980 t o t a l labor force pt-ri-cipation r a t e of 73.2 percent w a s higher than the A l a b a m a f i g u r e of 71.3 ~ e r z e n s and j u s t below the n a t i o n a l average of 74.7 percent.

The female p a r t i c i p a r i c z rate of 55.9 percent w a s above both the state and national figures; however, the a c t u a l percent of females employed (39.7 percent of the t o t a l employment; w a s below both the s t a t e and national l e v e l s.

The proportion of families with 2 o r more workers i n Limestone County i-.

1980 w a s 52.6 percent.

This w a s above the s t a t e f i g u r e of 50.9 percent, but below t h e nationwide average of 54.2 percent.

Age Composition--Generally, new i n d u s t r i e s are easier t o attract t o a_?

area which has a predominantly young labor force.

The labor force of Lixe-stone County contains a r e l a t i v e l y high proportion of young workers.

I n 1973, approximately 51 percent of the county's workers w e r e between 1 4 and 34 y e i r s of age compared t o the s t a t e percentage of 43.

Presently, no 1980 census Ea-T.

is available t o challenge t h i s d a t a, b u t indicators such as female l&or for=?

p a r t i c i p a t i o n and presence of children (detailed below) would indicate t h z r the work force has aged from 1970 j u s t based upon t h e i n j e c t i o n of older f e m l e workers alone.

Sex Composition--In 1980, females accounted f o r 39.7 percent of the Line-stone County t o t a l c i v i l i a n labor force as compared t o 33.7 percent i n 1970.

51

c There is strong evidence of the f a c t t h a t most l o c a l females work t o supple-ment family income.

In 1970, 65.3 percent of the county's female labor force were married, and 86 percent had children under 6 years of age.

By 1980, the percentage with children under 6 had dropped t o j u s t over 15 percent, indicat-ing strongly t h a t the decision t o work w a s economically motivated i n families a t the middle-age l e v e l as w e l l a s f o r single parents and younq couples j u s t s t a r t i n g out.

Working women a r e a common and both necessary and desired s i t u a t i o n i n our society and the trend is increasing.

However, long-term growth of t h e economy hinges on the a b i l i t y of the area t o provide jobs f o r men, o r z t least a t wage/

occupational l e v e l s t r a d i t i o n a l l y associated with m a l e employment.

Several of Limestone County's i n d u s t r i e s provide employment opportunities primarily f o r women.

I f the county is t o h a l t m a l e out-migration and raise wage l e v e l s, ad-d i t i o n a l i n d u s t r i e s must be a t t r a c t e d which provide employment or s k i l l e d males a t adequate wage l e v e l s.

This is i n p a r t due t o the f a c z t h a t our society is s t i l l male job income oriented and i n most family s i t u a t i o n s m a l e job opportunity s t i l l is t h e primary f a c t o r (usually f o r economic reasons) i n determining migration and job r e l a t e d relocations.

Race Composition--The proportion of Blacks i n the labor f c r c e i n Limestone County was low.

In 1970, 13.8 percent of the labor force w a s comprised of Blacks, compared t o 17.2 percent of the t o t a l population.

9y 13.80, the Black proportion of the c i v i l i a n labor force had dropped t o 1 3. 4 ? s c e n t, while the Black population had f a l l e n t o 1 4. 2 percent of t o t a l pogulatior.

Blacks made up 12.7 percent of a l l persons employed i n 1980 and had a t o t a l labor force p a r t i c i p a t i o n rate of 58.8 percent with a m a l e rate of 63.3 percenc and a female r a t e of 54.7 percent.

The o v e r a l l Black labor force p a r t i c i p a t i o n rate 58.8 percent (due t o the f a c t t h a t 52 percent of a l l Elack enployees a r e female) is actually.8 percent above the county-wide r a t e f o r a l l races, however, the "participation" i n unemployment (as a p a r t of t h e "labor force") w a s 1 3. 7 per-cent, compared with a t o t a l rate of 8.8 percent unemployment cscqtywide.

Many of these persons who are unemployed have been dis?,lzced from farms.

Generally, Blacks have fewer s k i l l s and a r e not a s well educatsi as Whites.

Basic education and t r a i n i n g programs should be i n s t i t u t e d co correct t h i s s i t u a t i o n.

Worker Mobility--As w a s discussed previously i n t h i s s~cl;., a s i g n i f i c a n t number of residents are leaving t h e area because of the lack of eqloyment op-p o r t u n i t i e s.

Other people though unable t o secure employment l o c a l l y choose t o remain i n the county since they are able t o find enploynent i n neighboring counties p r i n c i p a l l y, Madison and Morgan.

I n 1970, 5,481 workers o r 37.6 percent of the t o t a l 1 4, 6 5 3 residing i n Limestone County worked i n neighboring counties.

Included i n d-hFlis figure were 1,628 Athens' r e s i d e n t s o r 33.3 percent of t h a t c i t y ' s work force.

By 1980, t h i s f i g u r e was s t i l l about 40 percent countywice and represented about 6,400 r e s i d e n t s working outside Limestone County.

Madison County w a s 52

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

I 1

I s t i l l t h e leading market with about 2,750 of t h e jobs, and Morgan County a close second a t 2,550 jobs.

COMPONENTS OF THE ECNOMY The economy of Limestone County is comprised of s e v e r a l economic a c t i v i t i e s,

each a f f e c t i n g total economic change.

The purpose of t h i s sFction of t h e report is t o analyze past t r e n d s i n t h e various s e c t o r s of Limestone County's economy, p o i n t o u t s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses, and evaluate t h e i r p o t e n t i a l f o r f u t u r e growth and development.

AGRICULTURE Agriculture, u n t i l t h e mid 1970's had long been a p r i n c i p a l source of incoxe and basic employment f o r Limestone County.

As previously shown, up u n t i l 1950, Limestone County has c o n s i s t e n t l y had a higher proportion of i t s labor f o r c e er.-

gaged i n a g r i c u l t u r e than any o t h e r occupation.

However, from t h e mid 1950 through 1965 t h e county experienced a gradual change, away, from a predominantly a g r i c u l t u r a l economy t o a more d i v e r s i f i e d one with manufacturing now assuming t h e m o s t important role of p r i v a t e sector employment growth.

The t r e n d i n a g r i c u l t u r e i n Limestone County seems t o be a u n i v e r s a l one throughout t h e South.

While t h e number of farms is decreasinc, t h e number of acres p e r farm is i n c r e a s i n g.

The g r o s s number of a c r e s involve& i n farming a c t i v i t y is decreasing, however, a g r i c u l t u r e is s t i l l a major industry i n te-l;ns of value and income i n Limestone County.

The number of farms i n Limestone County declined from 4,399 i n 1949 t o 4,176 i n 1959 t o 2,025 i n 1971, and 1,436 i n 1974 and 1, 2 2 0 i n t h e most r e c e n t (1978) Census of Agriculture.

Most of t h i s d e c l i n e came i n t h e period between 1952 and 1959.

There w a s a concurrent i n c r e a s e i n t h e average s i z e of farms i n t h i s period.

The average s i z e farm increased from 110.4 a c r e s i n 1959 t o 150.0 acres i n 1971 and 200 acres i n 1978.

I n r e l a t i o n t o t h e increased acreage p e r farm, t h e average value p e r fa-m has increased p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y.

The average value p e r farm* has r i s e n from

$15,979 i n 1959, $30,514 i n 1964 t o $89,630 i n 1974 and $192,113 i n 1978.

The s i z e and value i n c r e a s e t r e n d is revealed c l e a r l y by t h e f a c t t h a t from 1974-1978, t h e average value per acre* of a farm i n Limestone Counz-J r o s e by 69.7 p e r c e n t from $532 t o $903.

A t t h e s t a t e l e v e l, average value _=er a c r e increase5 by 75 percent f o r t h e same p e r i o d, b u t t h e statewide average Yialue p e r a c r e i n 1978 was only $637, or j u s t over 70 percent of t h e Limestone Zounty average val.ie p e r acre.

One of t h e m a j o r changes t h a t has taken p l a c e i n Limestone County's a g r i -

c u l t u r a l i n d u s t r y during t h e past t w o decades, w a s t h e tremendous percentage i n c r e a s e of l i v e s t o c k production.

Livestock production made up, i n 1939, abour one f i f t h of t h e value of a l l farm products.

By 1964, t h i s seqment made up

• t o t a l value land and b u i l d i n g s 53

TeBLE 111-21 LIMESTONE COUNTY CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE SELECTED ITEMS AND DEFINITIONAL EQUIVELANCIZS 1974 AND 1978 All farms nomber..

Farms with sales bss than $2.500 number..

Land In farms..............................................................

aaes..

Farms and land In farms:

FWS.........................................................................

number.

Land In farms................................................................

aues.

Average dze of farm................................................

aues.

Value of land and buildings: I Average per farm............................................

Average per acre........................

FYZ%Bin40 acres...............................................

number.

10 10 49 acres.......................................................

number.,

50 lo 179 acres.....................................................

number..

180 10 499 acres...................................................

number..

500 lo 998 aaea...................................................

number..

1,OOo to 1.990 acres.............................................

number..

2.000 acms 01 more..............................................

number..

Aoricuhal produas sold and farm related Income:

Mame1 value of producls sold................................

Sl.Oo0..

Average per farm................................................

dollan..

crops.......................................................................

$1,000..

Poultry and poultry products....................

Sales of 520,000 or more.....................................

number..

$1 00,OOO or more..............................................

number..

S40,OOO to $99,999...........................................

number..

$20,000 to 539,999...........................................

number..

sales of lear than 52o.OOo..................................

number..

$10,000 (0 $19,9 90...............................................

f5,OOo to $8,999...............................................

lwmber..

52,500 to $4,999.............................................

nwnber..

Lsss thsn ~ 5 0 0

..........................-...................number..

Pafbmhtp................................................................

mmber..

Corpotation................................................................

number..

Other than farnity held..........................................

number..

Other-axperattvea, &tea or bunts, Liveslock and liveslock products............

Farms by value of sales:

woforgantzatkn:

FT& of tamity...........................................

..... tlufrku..

Famify held.............................................................

nwnber..

Instltutbnal. etc....................................................

number..

Operator charaderlatks:

Tenure of operator.

Full owner.................................................................

farms..

Pad owner...............................................................

f m

Tenant.......................................................................

farma.

1874 1978 1974 1

! 378 1974 1978 7

5 149 1 5 149 3 s c 9 2 879 1 2 2 0 1436 1 3 n 509 247 957 627 244 048 241 833 2 U 712 352 All farms 1078 1974 1 2 2 0 244 04.9 m

192 113 903 89 355 458 180 83 36 10 28 840 n 639 21 384 (Dl (0

24 1 76 71 94 979 150 21 2 265 352 1094 108 15 15 -

3 717 360 134 143 241 KX 162 89 6x 532 67 491 9 1 200 64 35 8

23 915 16 654 17 297 4888 1575 221 69 e.0 73 1215 14.9 m

p2 627 W)

(NA)

(HA)

W) w W) m 351 119 Appendix. Effect of Definition Change for Selected Items:

1978 and 1974 7

Total uopland............................................................

auea..

Harvested aopland................................................

848s..

Value of agrlarthJral products d d.........................

$1.000..

Cattle and calves Inventory...................................

number..

Hogs and plgs Invenlory.........................................

number..

crops.....................................................................

$1.000..

Liveslock. poultry. and (he(r prodocts................ $1,000..

Chikens 3 months old or older Inventory........... number..

172 475 184 465 128 981 110 528 28 840 23 815 21 364 17 307 7 458 6 463 28 314 39 140 10 801 7 187 (D) 150 654 174 178 1Es 667 129 368 110 746 28 878 P s a 21 396 17 418 7 4.92 5 4 8 8 28 833 33 454 10 925 7 2 5 4 (D) 1% 837 1 703 1202 385 218 38 45 12 19 25 25 31 9 305 34 9 183 3

n source: U.S. Census of Agriculture, 1978 54 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I B

I I

I i

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 1 i I

I I

I over JO p e r c e n t of t h e total s a l e s, i n 1974 t h e f i g u r e r e t u r n e d to about 2 0 p e r c e n t of total s a l e s, and i n 1978 t h e ownership had c o n c e n t r a t e d to such a degree t h a t sales f i g u r e s were withheld for census d i s c l o s u r e r e a s o n s.

By 1978, c r o p sales accounted f o r 74 p e r c e n t of a l l farm receipts i n Limestone County, up s l i g h t l y from 7 2 p e r c e n t i n 1972.

The t o t a l value of f a r m products s o l d i n c r e a s e d by 20.6 p e r c e n t o v e r t h e same p e r i o d and l i v e s t o c k s a l e s d a t a w a s not available.

The p r o d u c t i o n o f crops and t h e i r s a l e s v a l e con-tinued to i n c r e a s e over t h e l a s t s e v e r a l y e a r s, and t h e p r o d u c t i o n and sale of l i v e s t o c k has d e c r e a s e d relative to t h a t o f c r o p s.

Despite t h e d e c l i n e i n t h e number o f farms, farm operators, and acreage i n farms, p r o g r e s s i n a g r i c u l t u r a l technology h a s made p o s s i b l e an i n c r e a s e i n t h e d o l l a r v a l u e o f a l l farm p r o d u c t s s o l d i n t h e county.

From 1974 to 1978 a l o n e, t h e v a l u e of a l l p r o d u c t s sold i n c r e a s e d by approximately 2 1 per-c e n t i n Limestone County, compared w i t h t h e state, however, t h i s rate was o n l y one h a l f t h e Alabama i n c r e a s e of 41.3 p e r c e n t.

There e x i s t s, however a unique r e l a t i o n s h i p between farming, farm values of crops sold, and farm employment incomes and wages.

While t h e above in-creases occurred from 1974-78 i n c r o p and farm v a l u e s, when costs of production and o t h e r i t e m s a r e related t o a c t u a l income, a d i f f e r e n t growth t r e n d appears.

From 1975-1980 t o t a l p r o p r i a t o r s (farm) income dropped from $8,712,000 t o

$71789,00O--a loss of 45 p e r c e n t.

A d d i t i o n a l l y, i n terms of wages a n s s a l a r i e s P a i d, farm g e n e r a t e d income also f e l l from $10,619,000 to $7,802,000 ( a loss of 26.5 p e r c e n t ) f o r t h e same period.

I n o t h e r words, t h e costs of farming have reduced p r o p r i e t o r s incomes and a t t h e same t i m e, scale and mechanization have reduced t h e number of workers needed--and t h e i r associated t o t a l income.

T h i s t r e n d w h i l e n o t as severe as i n Limestone County, is p r e s e n t a t both t h e s t a t e and U.S. l e v e l.

In terms o f employment, a g r i c u l t u r e is r a p i d l y d e c r e a s i n g as a major in-d u s t r y.

I n 1960, approximately 25 p e r c e n t of t h e employed p e r s o n s i n Lime-s t o n e County w e r e farm workers.

By 1970, one Limestone County worker i n t e n w a s engaged i n farming, w i t h t h e number of farmers and farm workers d e c l i n i n g by over 1,390 d u r i n g t h e 1960 to 1970 period.

From 1970-1980, an a d d i t i o n a l 700 j o b s w e r e lost i n t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l sector (a 39 p e r c e n t d e c l i n e ) l e a v i n g a g r i c u l t u r e as about 6 p e r c e n t o f total employment f o r Limestone County resi-d e n t s :

The s i n g l e m o s t i m p o r t a n t r a m i f i c a t i o n r e s u l t i n g from t h e rapidly-changing s t a t u s of a g r i c u l t u r e is t h e need to r e t a i n and provide employment f o r t h e people displaced from t h e farms.

F a i l u r e t o do so i n t h e past w a s one, i f n o t t h e, major factor r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e l a r g e o u t m i g r a t i o n from t h e county.

In r e c e n t y e a r s, much h a s been accomplished along t h e s e l i n e s ; i n d u s t r i a l and t e c h n i c a l e d u c a t i o n h a s been a c c e l e r a t e d and expanded, and new employment op-p o r t u n i t i e s have been created, ho--:.e\\'er t h e r e is s t i l l room f o r improvement.

55

c MANUFACTURING Limestone County's t o t a l 1982 manufacturing employment w a s 4,528 and total wages and salaries derived from manufacturing were $87,934,700.

This represents the smallest t o t a l manufacturing employment of a l l TARCOG Counties, but the fourth l a r g e s t gross wage and s a l a r y payment.

I n per c a p i t a barker) terms, the figure comes t o $19,420, which exceeds t h e state-wide average by over $3,125.

This w a s the highest average wage and s a l a r y i n the e n t i r e TARCOG region f o r manufacturing employment, exceeding even the Madison County average of$18,285.

The General Motors employment a t t h e i r Saginaw Steering f a c i l i t y is primarily responsible f o r t h i s abnormal average wage and s a l a r y impact as most other manufacturing enqloy-ment is a t o r b e l o w state-wide wage averages.

Between 1970 and 1980, manufacturing replaced a g r i c u l t u r e as t h e dominate employment and income f a c t o r i n the Limestone County economy.

The most d r w t i c t r a n s i t i o n took place i n the second half o r the decade from 1975-80.

During this period manufacturing employment rose 112.4 percent, with about 90 percent of this growth i n the durable goods sector.

Corresponding by t o t a l i n the manufacvlring wages and s a l a r i e s rose by 432 percent, from 19.5 percent of t o t a l personal wages and s a l a r y income i n 1975, t o 37.6 percent i n 1980.

Major Trends -- S i g n i f i c a n t changes f i r s t began taking.place i n Limescone County a f t e r 1966.

In t h a t year, only about 800 of t h e county's jobs were in the manufacturing sector.

During t h r e e of the next four years, manufacturing employment increased by a t l e a s t 25 percent per year.

1968 and 1969, the 1969-1970 period registered a 50 percent increase, Durin5 the l a s t half of the 1960's (when Huntsville and Madison County w e r e losinq aerospace jobs and w e r e less able t o o f f e r employment t o residents of Limescorie County), a v a r i e t y of new i n d u s t r i e s moved t o Limestone County while a t the szxe t i m e many other i n d u s t r i e s, though primarily t e x t i l e and apparel firms, eqanEed t h e i r employment.

Between 1964 and 1970, inclusive, some 2,000 mre jobs i n new o r expanded industry were announced but t h e actual increase in manufacturicg en-ployment during t h e period w a s only about 1,000 jobs.

After a decline bet.een The General Motors P l a n t i n 1973 (and subsequent expansions) and the S t e e l -

case o f f i c e f u r n i t u r e f a c i l i t y i n 1979 were the major employers and income *acts of the decade f o r 1970-80.

The t o t a l 1982 workforce estimate f o r the t w o f z c i l i t i e s is about 2,125, o r about 47 percent of the counties t o t a l manufacturing eqloyment (70 percent of a l l durable goods manufacturing.)

It is f u r t h e r estimated ';?at due t o the pay scales of these f a c i l i t i e s they contribute about 70 percent of 211 wages and salaries paid i n manufacturing i n the county and about 25 percent o f all non-governmental ( s t a t e / l o c a l and f e d e r a l ) wages and s a l a r y income i n the county..

From 1975-1982 t h e t o t a l non-durable goods manufacturing sector has only gained 80 jobs, o r an increase of 5.3 percent. (ie. food and kindered prodccts and t e x t i l e s and r e l a t e d products.)

Indexes of Concentration.

Indexes of concentration ( I C ' s ) a r e a usefcl s t a t i s t i c a l t o o l measuring an area's specialization within the manufacturi-c sector.

An I C of g r e a t e r than 100 indicates t h a t the industry exceeds the 56 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I t

I I

I I

TMLE 111-22 I N D E X OF EHPU)YHP(T AND PAYROLL CONCENTRATION, ALABAMA ('fWlPARISON, LIMES'I'ONL. COIINTY, 1970-1980 T o t a l, A l l Reported Units' A g r i c u l t u r e, F o r e s t r y, c f i s h e r i e s C o n t r a c t C o n s t r u c t i o n m u f a c t u r i n g Food c Kindred Products Apparel 6 Other T e x t i l e Products E l e c t r i c a l Equipment 6 S u p p l i e s

" O t h e r " and -D-Items2 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 6 O t h e r P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s Wholesale Trade R e t a i l Trade Finance, Insurance, L Real E s t a t e S e r v i c e s u n c l a s s i f l e d E s tab1 is timen ts 100.0 1 3 9. 4 7 6. 4 320.0 6 4 6. 1 NAP 30.1 5 3. 8 159.68 1 2. 7 1 1 5. 1 r7.v 100.0 366.6 135:2 7 1. 5 7 0 6. 2 NAP 30.4 6 1. 5 LOH, 8 7 9. 6 162.3 100.0 LOO. 0 3 8 3. 3 9 6. 0 8 7. 1 2 2 1. 3 NAP 2 5. 4 5 7. 8 151. 6 1 2 4. 6 II 5. 7 60.0 io0.o 1no.o 1 7 5. 0 R O. R 3 0 5. 5 N A I' 2 4. 4 5 9. 1 2113.0 7 5. 4 1 4 9. 5 125.11 1 no 4 8 0 5 5 159 2 1 5 539 15 5 1 45 6 5 7 1 109 100 214 46 153 292 4 9 6 1 3 1 3 129 4 9 6 3

? 0 100 129 48 165 386-t 180 209 20 6 2 I OH f i 3 5 2 1 5 1 OLI 34 182 1 2 5 116 1 2 4 1 107 54 5 2 1 Figures r e p r e s e n t employment covered by the Federal I n s u r a n c e C o n t r i b u t i o n s A c t (FICA) only.

i n whole, o r i n p a r t by t h e S o c l a l S e c u r i t y Program, are excluded from the b a s i c t a b u l a t i o n s o f this table - Government employees, self-employed persons, farm workers. and domestic service workers r e p o r t e d s e p a r a t e l y.

included.

htd for t h e f o l l o w i n g Wpes of employment, covered A l s o. R a i l r o a d employment s u b j e c t to t h e Railroad Retirement A C

~

a r e n o t Includes a l l i t e m s not s p e c i f i c a l l y enumerated and n o t enumerated because of D i s c l o s u r e r u l e s.

i n some c a s e s because o f o v e r a l l d i f f e r e n c e s i n employment d i s t r i b u t i o n p a t t e r n s a t t h e t w o l e v e l s.

Category is n o t comparable or t h e U.S. and Counties

' ICE E Index of Employment Concentration ICE

= \\ T o t a l Employment Limestone 100

' ICP = Index of P a y r o l l Concentration

\\ T o t a l Employment V.S.A.

x 100 Icp I \\ of T o t a l P a y r o l l s Limestone

\\ o f T o t a l P a y r o l l s U.S.A.

0 = Figures n o t a v a i l a b l e due to d i s c l o s u r e of i n d i v i d u a l s t a t i s t i c s.

NAP

• Category ilot a p p l i c a b l e to c a l c u l a t l o n s.

SOUFCCE:

0. S. nurcau o f t h e Census, County Business P a t t e r n s, 1970. l c 1 7 3, 1977 and 1980 U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e, Washington, D.C.,

1971, 1 ' ) l. l. lw'l, l~ltl.'

TABLE 111-23 INDEX OF W L O Y -

M D PAYROLL. CQICDTrXATIrX, USA COWPARISON, LIHESTOHE CWNTY, 1970-1980 1970 1

3 I

d CE CP 1973 T 3 I n 4 CE 1977 1980 T a ICP6

=h 3

• CP4 cn co 100.0 100 100 100 100 -

Ibt.1, A l l Reported Units 100.0 100.0 100.0 550.0 575.0 750.0 584 288 159 40 103.1 91.6 180 170 202 207 Agriculture, ?orestry, L Fisheries 533.3 C o n t r a c t C o n r t r u c t i o n 164.2 KMUf A C t U 141.1 118.0 108.2 75 58 60 88.1 79.9 459 rood L Nndred Products A p p a r e l C Other T e x t i l e Products 543.5 687.5 731 7 34 553 466 L l a c t r i c a l Z q u i p e n t L S u p p l i e s 254.5 289.7 264 135 100 295 -

NAP Other and -& Iters2 N A P NAP N A P 13 98 64.8 31 41 50 42 33 29.2 22.7 23.0 14 12 20 149.7 203.9 142.6 204.6 102 131 100 87.5 100.0 100.0 125.0 92 88 83 h w p o r t a t i o n L Other P u b l i c u t i l i t i e s 28.3 Vholesala Trade kbil Trade

~irunca, I n a u r a n a, L Peal Est.ta Services m c l a s s i f i e d I s t. b l i a h m e n t a 1 Figures r e p r e s e n t uplo-t coverad by the rederr1 Inaurance C o n U i b u t i o r u A c t (FICA) only.

In w h o l *,

or i n part by the S o c i a l S e c u r i t y Program, ara excluded f r a t h e b s l c t r h r l a t i o n s of this t a b l a - m a - n t rp1-e..

s a l f - a p l q d psrmons, farm uorkers, and d m s t i c service workers r e p o r t a d s e p a r a t e l y.

Included.

54.1 37 45 60 37 50.0 55.1 53.6 60.9 7 0. 1 4 8. 5 128.4 99.5 113.2 50 48 4 0 109.2 bta for tha f o l l w i r q t r p. s of r p l v n t, anud Also, milrod a p l o y a n t subject to tha lullrod htirrunt A c t a r m aot Includes a11 1-n o t s p z c i f l u l l y e n r a e r a t e d and not e n r r e r a t e d k a u s a of D i. c l o n r r e rule..

Category is not oolplrable f o r tha O.S.

and Carntia i n -

U s e s because o f o v e r a l l d i f f e r e n c e s I n e q l o y w n t d i s t r L b u t $ o n p t t e m s a t t h e tvo level..

CP - Index of P a y r o l l Concentration 1-t of T o t a l P a y r p l l s L h e s t o n e

,00 t Of r0t.l P a y r o l l s U.S.A.

D - r i g u r e s not a v a i l a b l e due to d i s c l o s u r e of I n d i v i d u a l st.tistlcs.

SOUICE:

U.S. Bureau o f t h e Cenaus, County BumInesa P l t t e r n s, 1970, 1974, 1977, and 1980 N W - Catwory not a p p l l c a b l e t~ U l c u l a t i o M.

1 U.S. C o v e r w e n t P r l n t i n g O f f i c e, Yaahlnqton, D.C.,

1911, 1974, 1979, 1982

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 1

I I

I national average in employment, or payroll, an IC of less than 100 indicates the industry to be underdeveloped relative to the industry's position relative to the state or national economy.

Limestone County's specialization (within the non-durable manufacturing category) in the food, textile, and apparel groups is firmly established by using Location Quotients. The food and kindred group, made up primarily of poultry producers, had an IC (employment/U.S. based) of 459 in 1980, down slightly from its index of 493 in 1970, showing that Limestone County, during that ten-year period, was decreasing its food and kindred employment in rela-tion to the nation's employment in this category. However, employment depen-dence/concentration in this sector is still four times the national average and the state index of 386.

The combined textiles and apparels groups showed an overall steady trend over the decade, starting with an index of 544 in 1970, peaking at an index of 737 in 1977 and being back at about 550 by 1980. This was reflective of both nationwide trends and relative advances in durable goods manufacturing employ-ment. With a workforce level of about 700, textiles/apparels are still a major economic factor in the Limestone County economy.

Due to disclosure rules and the limited size of the manufacturing sector in Limestone County, no other indexes can be compared. The index for total manufacturing, however, which reflects strongly the impacts of General Motors, Steelcase and Brown Stoveworks shows an enormous growth trend from 88 in 1970 to over double the national average at 202 in 1980.

Income from Manufacturing--In 1970, the typical annual earnings of a manu-facturing employee in Limestone County was $3,979, the lowest for any of the five counties in the region. While data on most of the industries represented in the county were withheld because their small numbers present a disclosure pro-blem, it was apparent that the industry mix was comprised heavily of low-wage low-skill types.

By 1976, the average manufacturing wage and salary earnings had risen to

$6,972, and by 1982, due to the high wage industries outlined previously, the level was $19,420, almost 15 percent above the statewide average, and exceeding all counties in the TARCOG region. Estimates of manufacturing income excluding the GM and Steelcase facilities, however, show a manufacturing wage level about 20 percent below the statewide average. For instance, in 1980 the per capita wage in the combined apparel and textiles sector was $6,630 in Limestone County and averaged $9,111 statewide. Electrical equipment and supplies averaged

$10,458 in wages and salaries in Limestone and $12,963 statewide.

Problems and Opportunities--The employment mix of an over-dependence on high-wage, highly volatile/fluctuating employment industries and low-wage manu-facturing creates many problems for the county. Limestone may be considered to be a county with a moderate-sized manufacturing base, most industries (excluding GM) are still predominantly low wage in nature and do not promote in the work force or discourage out-commuting for moderate wage employment.

59

TABLE 111-24 LIMESTONE COUNTY, 1975 and 1980 (All figures in $1,000'~)

PERSONAL INCOME BY MAJOR SOURCES, AMOUNTS AND CHANGES Percent Percent Change Distribution Item 1975 1980 1975-1980 1975 1980 TOTAL Labor and Proprietors Income by Place of Work 1/

BY Type Wage and Salary Disbursements Other Labor Income Proprietors Income 2/

Farm Nonfarm 2/

0-l 0

By Industry Farm Nonfarm Private Ag. and Other 3/

Mining Construction Manufacturing Non-Durable Goods Durable Goods Transportation and Public Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate Services Government and Government Enterprises Federal, Civilian Federal, Military State and Local 84,811 63, 433 4, 246 17, 132 8,712 8, 420 84, 811 10,619 74, 192 46,945 284 0

5, 207 16, 587 10,586 6, 001 1, 270 3,211 10,750 1,392 8, 244 27, 247 11,551 67 9 15,017 234,236 193, 834 23, 460 16,942 4,789 12, 153 234, 236 7,802 226, 434 137,067 1, 488 0

6,694 08, 212 15, 778 72,434 2, 493 5,934 15, 833 3,741 12,672 89, 367 60,509 868 27, 990 176.1 205.5 452.5

-1.1

-45.0 44.3 176.1

-26.5 205.2 191.9 423.9

.o 28.5 431.8 49.0 1-,

107. 0 96.2 84.8 47.2 168.7 53.7 227.9 423.8 27.8 86.3 100.0 74.7 5.0 20.2 10.2 9.9 100.0 12.5 87.4 55.3

.3

.o 6.1 19.5 12.4 7.0 1.4 3.7 12.6 1.6 9.7 32.1 13.6

.8 17.7 100.0 82.7 10.0 7.2 2.0 5.1 100.0 3.3 96.6 58.5

.6

.o 2.8 31.6 6.7 30.9 1.0 2.5 6.7 1.5 5.4 38.1 25.8

.3 11.9 I

1

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

I

-I 1

I I

I 1

c TABLE 111-25 PERSONAL INCOME BY MAJOR SOURCES OF EMPLOYMENT SECTOR PERCENT OF TOTAL PERSONAL WAGE AND SALARY INCOME AND PERCENT CHANGE 1975-1980, LIMESTONE COUNTY, ALABAMA, AND THE USA 1975-80 197 5 1980 Manufacturing L i m e stone A l a b a m a USA 431.8 80.4 72.9 19.5 26.9 25.2 37.6 28.7 25.9 Wholesale Trade Limes tone A l a b a m a USA 84.8 69.3 73.9 3.7 6. 1 6. 6 2.5 6. 2 6.9 R e t a i l T r a d e 47.2 58.2 59.0 12.6 9.7 1 0. 2 6.7 9. 1 9. 6 L i m e s tone A l a b a m a USA Services 53.7 76.4 82.8 9.7 1 2. 8 16.2 5. 4 13.4 17.6 Limes tone A l a b a m a USA Federal G o v t.

Limestone A l a b a m a USA 423.8 48.6 44.9 13.6 7. 2 4.3 25.8 6.3 3.7 State and L o c a l G o v e r n m e n t 86.3 79.8 5 5. 1 17.7 1 1. 2 11.9 11.9 11.9 10.9 L i m e s tone A l a b a m a USA A q r i c u l t u r e Lime s tone A l a b a m a USA

-26.5

-21.8

-3.3 12.5 3.5 3. 1 3.3 1. 6 1.8 NOTE:

A l l figures refer t o t o t a l income by place of work i n L i m e s t o n e C o u n t y SOURCE:

U. S.

B u r e a u of E c o n o m i c A n a l y s i s, 1962.

6 1

TABLE 111-26 LIMESTONE COUNTY RNU Tllk; STATE; O F AIABAMA COVEI(El> EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES' BY INDUSTRY DIVISION, 19?6->-?

( 1, l i l l l 7,.1 $1 'J 5 ; N i 1;. 721 7,5(111 9, 1. I 1 7, 3 9 4 cJ, 7 4 L

______~

T o t a l number o f 'workers and wages p a i d tc w o r k e r s 111 firms c o v c r c d by t h e Unemploymellt c o m p c n s a t i o r l a w (E.G.--establishments employing 4 o r more workers)

• I n c l u d e s A g r i c u l t u r e. F o r e s t r y a n d F l s h e r l c s and minlnq and ~, l u n r r y l n q ( X ) f i r J u r c s not l i s t e d t o a v o i d d i s l o s u r e.

X F i g u r e s i n c l u d e d i n " A l l o t h e r " t o avold. i i s r - l u s u r i 7.

SOURCE:

Alabama i ) ~ p a r t m e n t of I n d u s t r i a l ~

~

I J

L

~

O

~

~

~

~

Research, and S t a t i s t i c s Division, 1 9 7 7 - 1983.

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

1 I

I I

I TABLE 111-27 LIMESTONE COUNTY AND THE STATE OF ALABAMA ANNUAL AVERAGE PAYROLL*

PER WORKER As A PERCENTAGE OF THE U.S. ANNUAL AVERAGE PAYROLL PER WORKER, 1967, 1970, 1973, 1974, AND 1976 1967*

1970*

1973*

1976*

1980 LIMESTONE Total, A l l Units Contract Construction Manufacturing Trans. & Pub. U t i l.

Wholesale Trade R e t a i l Trade Fin., Ins. & R e a l E s t Services ALABAMA T o t a l, A l l Units Contract Construction Manufacturing Trans.

& Pub.

U t i l.

Wholesale Trade Retail Trade F i n., Ins. & R e a l E s t.

Services 54.4 69.6 41.4 63.1 60.4 75.1 71.8 67.9 57.0 48.5 51.7 59.4 63.6 78.0 66.9 67.1 83.3 83.8 93.9 74.5 82.2 81.1 83.2 85.1 82.3 81.2 84.8 87.7 90.2 89.4 77.1 81.7 56.5 51.6 50.1 57.1 56.4 81.0 74.6 64.3 84.2 74.1 80.5 87.8 82.0 89.9 89.6 79.9 62.3 55.1 55.5 67.6 54.2 91.1 77.0 56.3 87.0 78.6 81.0 89.6 82.3 93.2 88.8 86.0 86.5 58.5 89.3 55.2 54.3 85.3 74.2 70.8 87.3 80.9 81.4 90.6 82.0 90.4 87.6 86.8

• Based upon 1st q u a r t e r m u l t i p l e p a y r o l l, n o t t o t a l p a y r o l l s.

SOURCE: Derived from:

U.S. Bureau o f the Census, County Business P a t t e r n s, 1967, 1970, 1973, 1974, 1976 and 1980.

Alabama, CBP 67-2, 70-2, 73-2 and 80-2.

Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e, Washington, D.C., 1968, 1971 1974,1977, 1978, and 1982 TARCOG 8/83 6 3

The international nature of the automotive and petro-fuels trade makes local prediction and economic planning for down" cycles difficult, if not impossible.

Therefore, it is paramount that the county concentrate its efforts on attracting additional moderate skill/payroll industry to the area to stabilize growth and revenue. The county is presently experiencing an economic growth "slump" in the manufacturing sector.

The unemployment rate in Limestone County has reflected nationwide and statewide trends, although the diversity of employment opportunities resulting from previous aggressive industrial development program have somewhat insulated the community from rapid upturns and downturns in the unemployment rate. Due to the fact that Limestone County was included in the Huntsville SMSA by 1970, esti-mates of the county unemployment rates are contrasted to SMSA rate since 1970.

The county unemployment rate in 1970 was 6.0% in contrast to the SMSA's rate of 4.4%. This rate increased in 1975 (mid-decade) following a steady 1970-1974 re-duction. The national recession affected Limestone to a greater extent that it did the SMSA. The county's 1975 unemployment rate increased to almost lo%, and the SMSA's increased to 7.9%. In 1977 the unemployment rate decreased to 9.1%

and the SMSA decreased to 7.6%. During the 1970-1977 period, the employed labor force increased through industrial and commercial expansion, thereby somewhat lessening the impact of nationwide recessionary and unemployment trends. Athens has become the undisputed commercial and industrial center in Limestone County.

By February of 1983, however, the SMSA rate had risen to 12.9 percent, Limestone County had a rate of 15.8 percent and Athens (the major employment center) was estimated to have a rate of just over 15 percent. This is reflective of the severe slow-down in the automotive industry and general manufacturing downturns.

In Limestone County, from 1981 to 1982, based upon annual average figures, there was a net county-wide loss of 220 jobs. Manufacturing employment declined by 40 jobs (net) with, the bulk of the nonmanufacturing loss being in the "govern-ment" sector (140 jobs lost). These unemployment figures would be more severe if it were not for the fact that an estimated 25 percent of the Limestone County work force commutes to Huntsville (Madison County) and Decatur (Morgan County) which have a more solid manufacturing growth rate.

It is significant to note, that no new industry has located in Limestone County for the past two years, and that less than 100 jobs have been officially announced from expanding industries for the same 2-year period.

The promising recent developments in manufacturing and the trend toward diversification that is most noticeable in the variety of new industries. The fabricated metals and electrical machinery industries were among the new types of industries with relatively high growth rates and at least moderate wage rates that have joined the county's roll of industries in the past few years. Chemi-cal, primary metal and instrument manufacturing firms were among the other, though smaller, new acquisitions. While the location of a General Motors plant in south Limestone County is evidence of the trend toward industrial expansion in this area, the plant is still to employ 6,000 by the year 2000.

64 I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

i 1

I 1

I 1

I I

I I

While overall, despite t h e current recession, t h e county appears t o be mov-ing toward a stronger and more diversified manufacturing base, and its excellent transportation access, its l a r g e number of i n d u s t r i a l sites, the abundance of p o w e r and other required u t i l i t i e s and the labor force p o t e n t i a l o f f e r advantages few other areas i n Alabama can provide, there are still problems which can be attacked locally.

I The location of t h e Steelcase f a c i l i t y i n the site ready building prepared by a previous unsuccessful location e f f o r t point out t h e value of a site ready s h e l l structure as an a t t r a c t i n g force for employnent growth.

In addition, the concentration of some e f f o r t on upgrading the l o c a l i n d u s t r i a l parks design; land reserves and planned development image would pzobably be of great b e n e f i t i n a t t r a c t i n g new industries.

Year m.; :oymerr Change From Previous Year I 97c 1,500

+ 2 5. G 1971 1972 IY73 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1.700 2,100 2.:oc 2.100 2.:00 I, 350 1.-40 4. 2 5 0 4,iSO 4.46C 4. 5 6 0 4, 540

+ 1 3. 3

+ 2 3. 5

+

4.8

+

4, s 8. 7

+ 4 5. 2

+ L a. 4

+ 1 3. E

+ 10.1 4. i

+

2.2

.4 l"AL CHANGE 1970-1982 - 202.7\\

SOURCE:

Alabama Employment Service, 1983 65

NON-MANUFACTURING Non-manufacturing is that segment of the economy generally referred to as the service/trades sector. Traditionally, growth in the non-manufacturing sector is dependent upon both the growth and development of the manufacturing segment of the economy, and the proximity to other large regional trade centers.

Duriing the 1970-1980 period, non-manufacturing employment in Limestone County increased by 1,310 workers, or about 14 percent. Nationally, relative to the manufacturing sector, the non-manufacturing sector is growing at a faster rate in terms of.employment and wages, and has a larger proportion of non-supervisory and production workers. In terms of sensitivity to cyclical fluctuations of the national business cycle, only the construction component is markedly sensi-tive, and none are highly sensitive. Most are either highly or markedly insen-sitive, indicating that an economy heavy in non-manufacturing is one which is better able to weather the ups and downs of the nation. In Limestone County, the growth of manufacturing employment and regional market patterns have caused non-manufacturing employment to be somewhat retarded in growth and lag both state and national averages as to both employment and payrolls/wages and salary levels.

Construction--Generally, the growth of the construction industry is closely but not completely tied to the growth of the area in which it is located.

Employment in the non government related construction industry remained al-most constant at a level of about 400 workers from 1970 ;o 1980. As a percent of total non-manufacturing employment in the county, it Seclined from 7.8 percent in 1970 to 5.1 percent in 1980.

Per capita worker wages and salaries in construction in Limestone County in 1982 averaged $11,051; this was about 35 percent below the state-wide aver-age construction wage of $16,966.

Transportation, Communication, and Utilities--Employnent in the transporta-tion, communications and utility industry has also chanqed ve??

little during the 1970-1980 period.

A s a percent of total non-manufacturing employment, it increased slightly from 1.5 percent in 1970 to 1.7 percent in 1980, but the actual worker increase was only 40 persons as with the ocher non-manufacturing sectors, average wages were lower than the state-wide average of $21,019 by almost $7,10O--or almost 34 percent. Part of this dLszresanc:~ can be accounted for by the fact that the high pay scale government e x ~ 1 c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t in utilities at Brown's Ferry is not averaged into this sector.

Government--The various combined levels of governnlrn~--f2deral, state, and local--are still (1980) the largest sector employers in lineszone County, em-ploying over 37 percent of the total civilian work force. 3uring the 1975 to 1982 period, approximately 830 workers were added to t??e cotal government pay-rolls in Limestone County. Of these, 690 (83 percent) were state and local em-ployees.

The major reason for the large fluctuations in Cavernment employment over the 1970-82 period was the construction and subsequent modification and update 66

I I

I I

I I

1 I

I 1

1 I

P 1

1 I

I 1

R c

of the nuclear power plant at Brown's Ferry by the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Included in the 4,200 employees in 1970 were approximately 3,100 workers at the Brown's Ferry site.

workers, they are paid by the Federal government; therefore, they were classi-fied as government rather than construction workers. Presently, there are still about 2,000 workers employed at Brown's Ferry (1982) and t h e number may fluctuate by 300-400 at any given time w i a project requirements.

Although the majority of these workers were construction The state and local average "government" payroll in Limestone County in 1982 was $12,204, compared with a statewide average of 513,043.

civilian employment in 1981, the average Limestone County payroll was about

$24,000, compared with a statewide average of just under $22,000. Ths federal payroll figure for Limestone County reflected the high construction scale wages at Brown's Ferry, rather than the predominance of General Schedule (GS) wages statewide.

For Federal government Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (FIRE)--The finance, insurance, and real estate industry normally accounts for a very small portion of the total enployment in any locality. This is especially true in Limestone County where both the rural nature of the county and the proximity to both regional markets (Huntsville a d Decatur) and national markets (Nashville) have kept employment in this sector low.

While total employment in the FIRE sector has increased by 120 percent between 1970 and 1980; this only represented an actual job increase of 120 jobs over the decade. Much of this increase can be traced to the overall transition in the banking and finance industry statewide and the opening of new BANKCOLD Branch offices in the Athens area to vie for the high salary deposits from tke General Motors Plant.

Average wages in the Limestone County FIRE sector were $12,871 in 1982, about 16 percent below the statewide average of $15,403.

TRADE The trade sector of the economy is comprised of two major activities--whole-sale and retail. The level of trade and service activity in Athens and Limestone County is influenced by several factors, two of the most important still bein?

a low per capita income and strong competition from Huntsville and Decatur, which draw many dollars of trade away from Athens.

Retail Trade--Retail trade in Limestone County is still "shadowed" by tlie proximity of both Huntsville and Decatur as major regional marketing centers.

The growth rate for retail sales in Limestone has shown significant effort at "catch-up" growth during the past six years.

Table 111-29 shows the total retail sales bv major sector in Limestone Councy from 1976 through 1982. The growth rate for total sales from 1976-71 was 35.5 percent which was significantly above the state average rate of 25.2 percent.

67

TABLE 111-29 TOTAL RETAIL SALES, LIMESTONE COUNTY 1976-82

( F i g u r e s i n $1,000'~)

DESCRIPTION 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1 9 8 1 1982 Food G e n ' l Stores w/Food and Gas Gen'l Merchandise Apparel F u r n i t u r e, F u r n i s h i n g s, etc.

Automotive Gasoline Service S t a t i o n s Lumber and B u i l d i n g Mat's Hardware and Farm Impl's E a t i n g Places Drug Stores A l l Other Retail Total Sales a t R e t a i l Total A l l S a l e s a t R e t a i l N o n r e t a i l and U n c l a s s i f i e d 22, 783 2, 945 6,940 2,519 1,907 19,746 6,648 2,179 5,588 4,388 1, 603 1 2, 183 89, 428 12, 301 1 0 1, 730 24, 007 3,147 5, 985 2,820 2,257 21,481 7,682 2,909 7,921 4, 782 1, 983 10,845 95, 819 15, 889 111,708 27,066 3,436 4, 970 3,082 2, 638 25, 518 9, 101 5, 108 9,051 5,657 2,805 12, 979 111, 4 1 1 1 7, 538 120,949 28,071 4, 372 4, 786 3, 867 2,664 22, 574 1 4, 455 4, 318 11, 530 5, 915 3, 095 14, 683 120,330 1 7, 5 5 1 137,881 31,423 3,064 5, 138 3,751 2, 579 1 8, 670 1 8, 930 7, 563 8, 014 5,493 3,413 13,007 1 2 1, 045 20,270 1 4 1, 315 32, 341 3,922 5, 243 4, 533 2,870 2 1, 097 18,455 9,992 4, 363 4,617 3, 695 13,447 124 I 576 22,416 146, 992 36,812 4, 799 5,066 5, 076 2, 866 23,692 14,455 8,674 4, 074 4,204 4, 146 11, 083 124, 947 22, 850 147,797 SOURCE:

Center for Business and Economic Research, The U n i v e r s i t y of Alabama, 1977-84

From 1979-82, however, even though total sales increased an additional 7.2 per-cent retail growth fell behind significantly behind the statewide averaqe in-crease of 13.5 percent.

U.S. Census retail sales growth trends, while comparable at the county level for some indexes such as total sales, payrolls and employment force growth are not a representative measure for Limestone County-for two reasons: (1) the last census data for retail trade published is 1977 (1982 is not in print) which does not reflect recent slow-down trends in the county; "market" average figures do not reflect the actual Alabama market conditions in which Limestone County is located in terms of both competing spheres of influence and prevailing wage and consumption patterns. For this reason, all data in this section will be based primarily upon statewide averages rather than any national indexes.

(2) t3e national Athens, the county seat, is the dominant retail force in Limestone County.

With a 1980 population of 14,558 it is the only community with more than 1,000 people and is centrally located within the county. In 1977 two out of 2ve-q three retail establishments were located in Athens and it accounted for greater than 80 percent of the county's retail sales and almost 90 percent of izs ie-tail payroll.

Table 111-30 which shows the per capita retail sales in Lirneszane C O U I I ' L ~,

TARCOG, and Alabama points out the significance of regional rnaricets ir. develos-ing retail trade. The Limestone total 1981 per capita sales figure oi 53,195 was only 59.9 percent of the statewide average of $5,333; however, ~ V C - Yadiscn County (a strong regional market) with per capita total sales of SF,245 could only come up to 79.6 percent of the state average. This points ouz z:?e fact that both potential market size and development of a sales infrastrJcZzre are important to a retail trade market*.

Total county employment in retail trade and wholesale trade cm3ir.edI ros2 by 600 persons from 1,300 in 1970, to 1,900 in 1980. This 46.2 _cercer.r qrowt:?

was slightly above the state average by 1982 an additional 100 wor:cers -4ere ez.-

ployed in the trades bringing the total to 2,000 workers.

In payrolls and related income characteristics, however, retail trade in Limestone County lags the state (and national) figures significLQtly. The 1952 average wage and salary paid in the combined wholesale and recail zraCss was

$9,627, only about 87 percent of the statewide average of $ l l, c ) 8 C.

Ir. relazir-e income terms, total wages and salaries from retail trade grew Cy 4;-2 _=.ercer.t in Limestone County from 1975-1980, compared with growth rates of 52 z.E 53 ~ s r -

cents respectively at the state and national level. While retail ;srxrsted waqe income averaged about 9.3 percent of total income state and i-.atio::cc~,

it or.l>-

contributed 6.7 percent of total income countywide in Limestone C o : x z y i n 1383.

This fact reflects both the below average wages and the stronq in_cacz zf nanu-facturing on the overall income structure.

• Based upon 1980 Census population figures.

69

.I 0 TABLE 111-30 TOTAL RETAIL SALES, SALES DISTRIBUTION AND PER CAPITIA SALES, LIMESTONE COUNTY TARCOG, AND ALABNW, 1901 (TOTAL SALES FIGURES IN $1.000'9)

DESCRIPTION LIMESTONE TARCOG ALABAt4A 8 TOTAL PER CAPITA SALES I TOTAL PER CAPITA SALES

% TOTAL PER CAPITA SALES 5

s Gen'l Stores w/Food and Gas 3,922 2.7 85 30,799 2.0 14 319,357 1.5 82 3,562,106 17.2 5

916 Food 12,341 22.0 703 315,478 20.0 S

763 Gen'l Merchandise 5,243 3.6 114 58,409 3.7 141 2,188,441 10.5 563 Apparel 4,533 3. 1 98 38,423 2.4 93 485,420 2.3 125 Furniture, Furnishings, etc.

2,870 2.0 62 45,950 2.9 111 2.5 135 526,266 Automotive 21,097 14.4 459 268,424 17.0 649 2,591,610 12.5 666 Gasoline Service Stations 18,455 12.6 401 85,129 5.4 206 1,181,287 6.7 355 Lumber and Euildinq Mat's 9,992 6.8 217 77,898 4.9 188 843,908 4.1 2P 7 llardware and Farm Impl's 4,363 3. 0 95 41,241 2.6 100 384,012 1. 9 99 Eating Places 4,617 3.1 100 98,993 6.3 239 1,035,630 5.0 266 Druq Stores 3,695 2.5 80 26,399 1.7 64 454.906 2.2 117 A11 Other Retail 13,441 9.1 292 232,054 14.7 561 2,442,527 11.8 628

'Total Sales at Retail 124.576 84.H 1708 1,319,273 83.6 3189 16,215,533 78.2 4,168 Nonretail and Unclassified 22,416 15.2 487 259,407 16.4 627 453.047 21.8 116 20,746,000 100.0

$ 5, 3 3 3

'Total All Sales at Retail -

146,992 100.0 S3,195 1,578,680 100.0

$3,816 k

r cap1 t,) Figut~cs l i. ~ s w i 11p011 19110 Cctisris I Y ~ N la~iwr

.~

~

_ _ _ _.. ~ _ _ ~

'!,(~IL C C :

~ ' C I I I I. ~

lot-r u ~ B I I l ~ l ~, h

.rnd ~:wt~cmtr 1k~c.irc11,

' 1 % ~ !htvcrsi t y of Aliil~.iiilrl, 19H?

1

LIMESTONE COUNTY RETAIL TRADE SALES, PAYROLLS, AND EMPLOYEES, 1963, 1967, 1972 and 1977 Sales1 ( I n s~,ooo's) 1 1963 1967 1972 1977 Building Materials, Hardware, Garden Supply, General Merchandise Group S t o r e s Food S t o r e s Automotive Dealers Gasoline S e r v i c e S t a t i o n s Apparel & Accessory S t o r e s F u r n i t u r e, Home Furnishing$ and Eating and Drinking P l a c e s

- 1 Drug S t o r e s and P r o p r i e t a r y S t o r e s Farm, Mobile Home Dealers Equipment S t o r e s 1

P Miscellaneous Retail S t o r e s R e t a i l Trade, T o t a l 4, 746 3, 085 8, 273 8, 082 3, 033 1, 663 1,922 1, 238 890 3, 093 37, 140 3,232 3,324 9,112 9, 728 3,447 1,962 1, 506 1, 119 1, 231 3,162 38,442 6,635 5, 275 13,926 13, 652 5,579 3, 375 2, 800 3,008 (D) 0 60, 521 7,679 D

26, 500 21, 060 8,479 5, 224 4,130 D

3,342 7,436 95,457 2, 998 j, 241 5,423 9,022 Payroll2 ($1,000'~)

- T o t a l 1, 022 1, 013 1

i 180 1,454 Paid Qnployees3 1

• For t h o s e Establishments with P a y r o l l 3

T o t a l, All Establishments For Establishments w i t h P a y r o l l, Week of March 12 for 1967, 1972 and 1977, and t h e week of Nov. 1 5, 1963 D Withheld t o Avoid Disclosure of I n d i v i d u a l F i g u r e s NA = Data n o t a v a i l a b l e SOURCE:

U. S. Census, Census of Retail Trade, Alabama, 1963, 1967, 1972 and 1977.

I

TABLE 111-32 RETAIL TRADE AND SELECTED SERVICES DATA LIMESTONE COUNTY AND ALABAMA 1967, 1972 and 1977 1967 1971 1977 Number Index Number Index Number Index

9.

LIMESTONE COUNTY Retail Trade Retail Sales ($ooo's) 38,442 No. of Establishments 316 Sales: Income Ratio (%)

50.7 Sales Per Estab. ( $ 0 0 0 ' ~ )

122 Selected Services Total Receipts ( $ O O o ' S )

2, 487 No. of Establishments 154 Receipts/Estab. ($ooo'S) 16 Receipts: Income Ratio ( % )

3.3 Retail Trade Total Sales ( $ 0 0 0 ' ~ )

4,120,340 No. of Establishments 28, 752 Sales Per Estab. ( $ 0 0 0 ' ~ )

143 Sales: Income Ratio ( % I 53.1 Selected Services Total Receipts ( $ 0 0 0 ' ~ )

573,796 No. of Establishments 14,782 Receipts/Estab. ( $ 0 0 0 ' ~ )

39 Receipts: Income Ratio ( % )

7.4 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 60,521 157 95, 457 384 122 360 158 130 265 50.4 47.9 4,664 188 7,093 223 145 201 21 130 35 3.. 9 3.6 ALABAMA 6,583,615 160 10,704,902 32,401 113 31, 582 203 142 339 54.5 51.4 1,119,812 195 1 695,790 20,380 138 21, 878 55 142 78 9.3 8.1 248 114 218 285 13 1 2 19 260 110 237 296 148 200 NOTE: The following indices, using 1967 as the base year indicate changes in prices nationally:

1967 1972 1977 All Consumer Commodities 100 121 17 5 Services Less Rent 100 136 202 SOURCES: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Business, 1967:

Census of Retail Trade, 1972, 1977; Census of Selected Services, 1972, 1977.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Unpublished Data from the Regional Economics Information System.

72 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

TABLE 111-33 PER CAPITA WHOLESALE SALES FOR TARCOG COUNTIES THE DISTRICT, THE.STATE, AND THE USA 1958, 1967, 1972, and 1977 PERCENTAGE INCREASE County 1958 1967 1972 1977 1958-1967 1967-1972 1972-1977 DeKa lb Jackson Limes tone 4

Madison Marshall W

Region Alabama US A 235 278 188 494 1, 063 482 885 1,902 425 440 20 2 824 1,768 812 1,305 2,328

.$1,043 842 591 1,273 2,326 1, 277 2, 141 3,283

$1, 586 950 990 2,601 3, 285 2,198 3,844 5,772

+81

+5 8

+ ?

+6 7

+66

+6 8

+47

+2 2

+145

+ 91

+19 3

+ 54

+ 32

+ 57

+ 64

+ 41

+5 2

+13

+68

+104

+41

+72

+80

+76 Source:

Census of D u s i n c s s, 1 3 5 8, 13GI, 1372, and 1977. Who1cs;ilc Trade:

AIabama, U.S.A.

Summary.

Wholesale Trade--Limestone County's total wholesale sales were the lowest among the five TARCOG counties in both 1972 and 1977. The strong influence of large nearby cities (Birmingham and Nashville) 90 to 100 miles away, is felt in this trade activity just as it is in retailing. It should be noted that while Limestone's wholesale trade total sales from 1972 to 1977 rose by 74.7 percent, this figure was significantly below both the statewide average of 88.2 percent and the national figure of 84.1 percent. From 1972 to 1977, the actual number of establishments listed as wholesalers dropped from 46 to 44 in the county.

Relative growth due to income from the wholesale sector has been above average in Limestone County. From 1975-80, total wages and salaries rose by 84.8 percent significantly above both the state and national figures of 69.3 and 73.9 percent respectively.

As would be expected from the retail discussion previously, per capita wages in wholesaling are below both the state and national averages. In 1980, the Limestone County figure was just over 54 percent of the national average and 67 percent of the statewide figure. In relative terms since 1967, the per capita worker wage and salary in wholesale trade has gone down (as a percentage of the U.S. average) every year since 1970 (see table 111-33).

Limestone County's position with respect to water, rail, air, and highway transportation routes offers an excellent opportunity to tap the large north Alabama wholesale market. This sector of the county's economy should be among the most promising over the other areas in terms of these competitive advantages and should be a leading potential source of new jobs over the next several de-cades.

Service--The service activities of the nonmanufacturing sector of the economy are perhaps the most diversified and include business and repair ser-vices, personal services, amusement, entertainment, recreation services, and hotel, motel, and tourist courts.

The per capita wage and salary in the services sector is also below the state average in Limestone County. In 1982, county service workers averaged

$9,402, which was $3,390 or 26.5 percent below the statewide average service wage of $12,792.

The growth of services sector employment from 1970 to 1980 was eratic in Limestone County due in part to the reduction of aerospace/defense employment and employees and some service related government contracts. From 19'10-75, service employment actually reduced from 900 to 800 workers, with only a rise back to 840 employees by 1980 and 940 by 1982.

The total wages and salaries paid out in the services sector from 1975-80 rose by only 53.7 percent in Limestone County, compared with 76.4 percent in Alabama and 82.8 percent nationwide.

EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS Limestone County, as a part of the Huntsville metropolitan area, is expected to share in its growth. Total employment is expected to rise from 13,800 in 1980 to 17,662 in 1990 and then increase to over 21,000 by the year 2000.

74 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

I 1

I I

I I

1 1

I I

1 1

I 1

I t

TABLE 111-34 PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT FOR LIMESTONE COUNTY 1990-2000 1980 1990 2000 13, 800 17,662 2 1, 054 TOTAL EMPLOYMENT Manufacturing Durable Goods Lumber Products & Fun.

Primary Metals Fabricated Metals & Ord.

Machinery, including Elect.

Transportation Equipment Other Durable Goods Food & Kindred Products Textile & Apparel Paper, Printing & Pub.

Chemical & Allied Prod.

Petroleum Refining Other Non-Durable Goods Non-Durable Goods Non-Manufacturing Construction Trans., Corn. & Public Util.

Wholesale & Retail Trade Finance, Ins. & Real Est.

Service (except H'holds)

Government 4,460 2,810 NA NA NA 1, 500 NA NA 1,

650 900 7 10 NA NA NA NA 8, 240 420 140 1,900 220 840 4, 690 6,759 3,823 104 8 4 775 2,195 1 5 1 514 2,936 1, 238 824 244 158 NA 47 2 10,314 612 277 2, 047 3 57 1,379 5, 642 7,959 4, 540 111 98 779 2,767 163 622 3,419 1, 476 878 312 206 NA 547 1 2, 560 68 3 366 2,236 460 2, 784 6,031 All

- Other Non-Agricultural 589 53 5 Agricultural 1, 100 SOURCE: Industrial Land Potential Study (for DeKalb, Jackson, Li3estoner Madison, and Marshall Counties) TARCOG, June, 1976 ( R e v i c e, 1983.)

75

As Limestone County continues to become more urban in nature, the type of employment should reflect this change. The proportion of agricultural workers will continue to decrease while the percentage of blue and white collar workers will increase. (See Table 111-34)

POLICIES The future do%s not always conform to the trends of the past, and there is good evidence that the growth trend will increase in Limestone County. The two basic policy questions facing the county are: How much growth should be pro-vided for, and where should it take place? An additional question that is in-evitably involved in an attempt to answer these questions is: To what extent can Limestone County chart its own course in the area of future population growth.

The question of population growth in Limestone County relates far more to human values associated with quality of life than to the physical availability of space. Less than 10 percent of Limestone County's land area is developed at the present time. If the entire land area of the county were developed at a density comparable to the average density of the developed portions of the City of Athens, the County would contain more than 1,750,000 people. However, there would be no agricultural lands, no wetlands or wooded wildlife areas, and relatively little open space recreational use. The effects of such development on water quality, air quality, social organization, etc. are impossible to quantify at this point in time, although parallels could be drawn with urban areas that currently contain more than 1,750,000 people. Growth policy for Limestone County relates to how much growth is considered desirable by residents and to popula-tion pressures placed upon the county by migration and internal expansion, not to the amount of space that is immediately available.

The following policies have been adopted by the Limestone County Rural De-velopment Committee:

1.

2.

3.

4.

Provide for moderate population growth at a steady level somewhat above the growth rate of the 1970's.

Current population projections for Limestone County in the year 2000 pro-ject a population of 65,000. It is suggesteci that Limestone County use this projection as a guide for long-range 2lmning and that estimates of current population be made in order to monitor population growth per-f ormance.

Encourage a greater proportion of future population growth to occur in the cities and towns of the county.

Assist the smaller cities and towns in assessing their growth potential and attracting additional population and development.

Permit local variation in growth policy based upon local potential and pre-ferences where such variations would support major county objectives and promote inclusiveness.

76 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

I 1

1 I

I I

1 I

I 1

~I 1

I I

I

5.

Prevent the institution of policies or practices within the county that exclude people from living or working in any community on the basis of race, sex, national origin, income level or religious affiliation.

6.

Utilize the physical distribution and arrangement of land uses as one method for overcoming and preventing the spatial segregation of various population groups.

77

CHAPTER -4

. HOUSING The Congress of t h e United States established a national goal i n t h e Hous-ing A c t of 1949 c a l l i n g f o r "a decent house and s u i t a b l e l i v i n g environment f o r every American family."

This goal w a s reaffirmed by the Housing A c t s of 1954, 1968, and 1970.

The Housing and Community Development A c t of 1977 has been the l a t e s t reaffirmation of t h i s 30-year old Congressional goal.

Limestone County and, i n p a r t i c u l a r, the r u r a l areas of Limestone County present housing conditions t h a t do not indicate s a t i s f a c t o r y progress towards meeting t h i s national goal.

Seventeen percent of unincorporated Limestone County's r e s i d e n t i a l s t r u c t u r e s exhibit e i t h e r needs f o r c o s t l y major r e p a i r s o r a r e dilapidated beyond r e p a i r.

This percentage f a r exceeds the National percentage of under t e n percent.

I n order f o r Limestone Coaqty t o develop a program with the purpose of implementing t h e national housinq goal and improv-ing local housing conditions, the following housing element was prepared.

This element w i l l analyze the present and projected housing demand f o r Limestone County, p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r the unincorporated zrea of Limestone County.

In addition, t h e p r e s e n t condition of housing, t h e current problens associated with housing, the o b s t a c l e s t o t h e solution of these problens, e f f o r t s previously undertaken t o promote improved housing conditions, and a prososed housing pro-gram f o r t h e meeting of current and f u t u r e housing needs i n Limestone County w i l l be presented.

THE. BACKGROUND TO HOUSING Housing is a complex subject which depends on t h e inte-Tlay of many f a c t o r s.

To a l a r g e extent, t h e housing s i t u a t i o n is dependent upon t h e overall growth and economic conditions of t h e County.

Among the important f a c t s t o be con-sidered are a continuing growth rate, expanding cnployment, income d i s p a r i t y between urban and r u r a l areas of the county, the sporadic nature of housing con-s t r u c t i o n, a gradual b u t discernable s h i f t from single-family towards multi-family construction p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the immediate Athens a r e a, continuing home ownership trends i n single-family housing, and increasingly rapid land use change i n developing areas t h a t w e r e predominantly r u r a l i n nature.

POPULATION G R O W T H Limestone County has witnessed a moderate, but steady increase i n popula-t i o n growth since 1960.

The 1960 population of 36,513 increased 5,186 people t o 41,699 i n 1970, and t h i s population increased 4,306 people t o 46,005 i n 1980, the most recent decennial census count.

iz is projected t h a t Limestone 78 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

County w i l l increase by 4,395 people by 1990, and have a 1990 population of 50,400.

a continuation of t h e current moderate, a l b e i t steady growth exhibited over t h e previous twenty years.

Between 1990 and the year 2000, population growth is expected t o accelerate, and t h e population w i l l increase by 14,600 t o 65,000.

Limestone Countys acquisition of new i n d u s t r i a l development (including limited high-technology development i n eastern/southeastern Limestone County) is pro-jected t o assist t h i s trend i n accelerated population growth.

This growth i n population over t h e next ten years is considered t o be The implications f o r housing are clear.

I n t o t a l, Limestone County must I n the un-prepare f o r a housing u n i t increase adequate to support an almost 50 percent increase i n the number of persons residing i n t h e county i n 1980.

incorporated area, Limestone County must prepare f o r t h e provision of adequate s h e l t e r or a similar 50 percent increase i n population.

Failure to do so w i l l simply compound the present d i f f i c u l t i e s i n r e l i e v i n g t h e backlog of inadequate housing already present i n unincorporated Limestone County; t h i s housing con-sists of seventeen of a l l e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t i a l structures.

HOUSING RESOURCES I n order t o b e t t e r understand the nature of the Limestone County housing s i t u a t i o n, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n rural Limestone County, f a c t o r s such as housing con-d i t i o n, housing age, vacancy information, housing value, and the demand f o r additional housing are necessary t o take i n t o account.

HOUSING CONDITION Housing condition information provides i n s i g h t i n t o how w e l l existing resi-d e n t i a l structures are serving as adequate shelter f o r t h e i r inhabitants.

This information can b e s t be inventoried through an exterior survey of a l l residen-t i a l structures i n t h e planning area (unincorporated Limestone County).

I n ac-cordance with t h i s need, t h e Top of A l a b a m a Regional Council of Governments I

(TARCOG) conducted an e x t e r i o r survey i n t h e summer of 1982.

Table E l

presents the housing conditions d a t a f o r unincorporated Limestone County.

TABLE IV-1 HOUSING STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS LIMESTONE COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREA Classification N u m b e r Percent of Total (Conventional Structures)

Sound

.I 9,188 66.1 Minor Repair 2,362 16.9 Major Repair 1,497 10.7 Dilapidated Total 854 13,901 6. 3 100.0 (96.9 percent of t o t a l s t r u c t u r e s )

Mobile Homes 438 3.1 (percent of t o t a l s t r u c t u r e s )

Total 14,339 100.0 SOURCE:

TARCOG SlZructural Conditions Field Survey, Summer, 1982.

I I

I I

I I

79

TABLE IV-2 LIMESTONE COUNTY, CHANGE I N DWELLING UNITS, 1960-1970-1980 1970-1980 1970-1980 Numerical P e r c e n t a g e Numerical P e r c e n t a g e Change change a

q e

S t r u c t u r e 1960 1970 1980 Change U n i t s One 9, 7 3 7 11,243 13,569

+1,506

+15.4 2, 3 2 6

+20.7 Tbv or more 625 734 1, 2 6 3

+

1 0 9

+17.4 529

+72.1 1 4 5 700 1, 5 2 1

+

555

+382.8 - -

8 2 1

+117.3 Mobile Homes T o t a l 1 0, 5 0 7 12.677 1 6, 3 5 3

+2,170

+ 20.7 3,676

+29.0 SOURCE:

U.S. C e n s u s of Housing, 1960, 1970, 1980 TABLE Iv-3 TARCOC HOUSING TRENDS, TOTAL UNITS 1970-1980 CENSUS AREA 1970 1980 CHRNGE 1970-80 NUMBER P E 3 E X I DeKalb County J a c k s o n County Limestone County Ardmore Athens Elkmont Lester Mooresville Rural Area' Madison County M a r s h a l l County TARCCG Region Alabama U.S.A.

1 4, 7 2 9 1 2, 9 6 6 12,677 287 4, 5 6 3 135 25 31 7,636 56,826 1 8, 5 5 5 1 1 5, 7 5 3 1, 1 2 0, 2 3 9 6 8, 7 0 4, 3 2 0 20,888 1 9, 6 2 0 16.497 402 5, 5 9 8 171 40 28 10.258 71,123 26,669 154,797 1, 4 6 2, 7 3 8 8 8, 2 7 7, 3 4 5 6, 1 5 9 6.654 3,820 1 1 5 1, 0 3 5 36 1 5

-3 2,622 14,297 8,114 39,044 342,499 1 9, 5 7 3, 0 2 5 4 1. 8 51.3 30.1 40.1 22.7 25.7 60.0

-9.7 34.3 i 5. 2 43.7 3 3. 7 30.9 28.5

• Unincorporated p o r t l o n of c o u n t y.

SOURCE:

U.S. CENSUS, 1970, 1980.

80 I

I I

1 I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

I c

I B

I I

TABLE IV-4 HOUSING

SUMMARY

1980 TARCOC REGION LIMESTONE T o t a l

" R U r d l "

DeKdlb J a c k s o n Limestone Athens Limestone Mddison M a r s h a l l TARCM; A l d b d m F a m i l i e s 1 5, 4 7 1 P e r s o n s 53,658 liouseholds 1 9, 2 4 1 Year Round 20,620 Occupied U n i t s 19,247 T o t a l U n i t s 20,888 hmer TOtd1 1 5, 0 1 0 i Occupied 78.0 Renter T o t a l 4.23?

1 Occupied 2 2. 0 1 4, 6 1 6 1 2, 6 9 0 5 1, 4 0 7 46,005 1 7, 6 8 9 1 5, 8 5 8 1 9, 6 2 0 1 6, 4 9 7 1 9, 3 2 0 1 6, 3 5 8 1 7, 6 8 9 1 5, 3 5 8 13,200 1 1, 3 2 1 74.6

73. I) 4. 4 8 9 4, 0 8 7 25.4

26. 3 4,043 8.647 1 4, 5 5 8 31,447 5,287 1 0, 5 7 1 5,597 10.761 5,287 1 0, 0 7 1 3,406 7, 9 1 5 65.4 78.6 1.881 2,156 34.6 21.4 5, 5 9 8 1 0, 8 9 9 5 2, 6 2 0 196,966 6 7, 0 8 2 7 1, 1 2 3 71,040 67.082 4 4, 800 6 6. 8 22,282 33.2 18,902 65,622 23.489 26,669 25,716 23,489 17,604 74.9 5,885 2 5. 1 114,299 413.658 142,865 154,797 153,049 142,865 101,935 71.4 40,930 28.6 1, 0 3 8. aai 3. 8 %. 888 1, 3 4 1, 8 5 6 1, 4 6 7, 3 7 4 1, 4 5 0, 0 1 1 1, 3 4 1, 8 5 6 941,219 70.1 400,637 29.9

- S. Census O f POpuldCiOn and Housing. 1980 - Summary Tape F i l e 3A 1982 TABLE IV-5 POPULATION HOUSING UNITS AND PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD, 1970-1980 P e r s o n s P e r Household 1970-1980 Per:

it Chanqe T o t a l Housing Number Change 1970-80 T o t a l P o p u l a t i o n U n i t s 1970 1980 No.

P e r c e n t k K d l b J a c k s o n Limestone Xadison Y a r s h d l l TARCOG A 1 abdmd 2 7. 8 3 1. 1 1 0. 3 5. 5 21.0 1 3. 8 1 2. 9 41.8

51. 3 30.1 25.2 43.7 3 3. 7 30.9 3.1095 2.7879

-.3216

-10.34t 3.2630 2.9061

-. 3569

-10.34%

3.4634 2.9955

-.4679

-13.51\\

3.5150 2.9362

-. 5788

-16.47%

3.1682 2.7937

-.3745

-11.82%

3.3752 2, 8 9 5 4

-.4798

-14.221 3.2526 2.9008

-. 352

-10.816 SOURCE:

U. S. Census, 1970, 1980.

81

c TABLE IV-6 OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY TENURE BY JURISDICTION, 1980

~~

~~

~

~~

L i m e s t o n e T c t a l I' R u r a 1 "

DeKalb J a c k s o n L i m e s t o n e A t h e n s L l m e s t o n e M a d i s o n Marshall TARCOG Alasa-n NUMBER

?eta! i l n i t s 19,247 17,689 15.350 5.287 10,071 67,082 23,489 142.865 i.241.856

?"',,.?r i5,oio 13,200 11,321 3,406 7,915 44,800 17,604 101.935 34 1,219

?.enter 4,237 4,489 4,037 1.881 2,156 22,282 5,885 40,930 4 3 C. 6 3 7 PERCENTAGE T o t a l 100.0 100.0 1on.o 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 ion. o 120.3 W n e r 78.0 74.6 73.7 65.4 78.6 66.8 74.9 71.4 io.1

?.enter 22.0 25.4

26. 3 34.6 21.4 33.2 25.1 28.6 29.9 T o t a l s may not a d d d u e to r o u n d i n g.

53URCE:

U. S. C e n s u s of P o p u l a t i o n a n d H o u s i n g, 1980. Summary T a p e F i l e 1A.. 1982 TABLE IV-7 TARCOG REGION HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION BY RACE AND TENURE, 1980 LIMESTONE Total

" R u r a l "

DeKalb J a c k s o n L i m e s t o n e A t h e n s L i m e s t o n e Madison M a r s h a l ?

?XR@X X 1 3 ; a = a kiouseholds T o t a l 19,247 17,689 15,358 5,287 10,571 67,082 23,489 142, E65 1,3;?.556 0 W h i t e 18,893 16,933 13,504 4,547 8,957 55,384 23,135 127,849

1. :<C, 247 R e n t e r 4,092 4,236 3,437 1,624 1,813 16,525 5,721 34,011 Z E 2. 5 7 9

?!inorirL' 3 54 756 1,854 74 0 1,114 11,698 354 15.016 l21.509 3'2ner 14,801 12,697 10,067 2,923 7,144 38,859 17,414 93.838 771.<62 h e r 209 503 1,254 483 771 5,941 190 8.C97 L5?.Y5?

?.enter 145 253 600 257 34 3 5,757 164 6. 9 1 9 I I. l. 7 5 6

• B l a c k p l u s a l l o t h e r m i n o r i t y g r o u p s sO!;RCE:

U.S.

C e n s u s of P o p u l a t i o n a n d H o u s i n g, 1980 Summary T a p e F i l e 3 A. 1982.

82 I

I I

I I

1 I

I i

I I

I 1

I :

1 I

I i

TABLE IV-8 LIMESTONE COUNTY:

OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS CONDITIOIU'S Ei' AGE, FAMILY S I Z E S'i'ATUS, 1900 CENSUS P!,CE, AND Renter:

Total E l d e r l y Negro Gwner:

T o t a l E l d e r l y Negro T o t a l :

T o t a l E l d e r l y Negro Total U n i t s Percentage D i s t r i b u t i o n by Category Total 4, G37 I, 007 560 11,321 2,903 1,525 100 - 00 26.3 24.9 6.6 1 3 -87 3.6 100. GO 25.6 11.06 73.7 18.9 8.2 15,358 LGO. 00 100.0 1, e l 2 11.83 11.6 3,910 25.5 25.5 4,037 100.00 2G. 3 Renter:

T o t a l H ' h o l d s 3,375 8 2. GO 22.0 661 1 5. 4 3 4. 3 11.321 1oil.00 73.7 1,687 14.90 11.0 1-4 pers H'holds 5+ pers H'holds Owner:

T o t a l H'holds 9.634 8 5 - 1 0 62.7 1-4 p e r s H'holds 5+ pers H'holds 15,358 13,009 2,349 Total:

T o t a l H'holds 1-4 pers H'holds 5+ pers H'holds 100.00 84.71 15.29 100.0 8 4. 7 15.3 T o t a l s May N o t A d d Due to Rounding SOURCE:

U. S. Census 1980 and TARCOG S t a f f C a l c u l a t i o n s, 1982 83

The classifications of condition as utilized in the field survey are pre-sently as follows:

1.

Sound - housing obviously needing only present maintenance in order to maintain a high standard of livability.

2.

Minor Repair - housing needing conservation, i.e., some new shingling, electrical work, and other minor repairs to maintain quality livability.

3.

Major Repair - housing needing rehabilitation, i.e., re-roofing (as opposed to single repairs) and new plumbing systems, joists, tuck pointing, and electrical systems in order to remove substandard features.

4.

Dilapidated - housing obviously too deteriorated to be worthy of rehabili-tation costs. This situation exists where the cost of a new home would probably be below the cost of extensive rehabilitation efforts.

Note: Mobile homes, due to their factory-site manufacturing characteris-tics were not rated but were counted in the survey.

The unincorporated area of Limestone County in 1982 comprised 14,339 resi-dential structures. Of the 14,339 structures, 438 were mobile homes (3.1 per-cent of total structures) and the remaining 13,901 structures were conventionally built (comprising 96.9 percent of the total). The percentage of mobile homes in unincorporated Limestone County is indicative of the lower median family in-comes prevalent in rural areas in Alabama. Of the 13,901 structures analyzed by condition, 2,351 structures or 17.0 percent were classified as currently substandard (needing major repairs or dilapidated). The remaining 11,550 struc-tures or 83.0 percent were classified as being of standard condition (sound or needing minor repairs only). The substandard structures are fairly evenly scattered throughout the unincorporated area with very few true "concentrations" or clusters of substandard housing. Concentrations exist. in the Burgreen Gin area, Salem area, Pine Ridge-Hampton area.

Concentrations exist in the latter six areas primarily due to the fact that these areas consist of developed but unincorporated communities with larger concentrations of housing in all four classifications.

Throughout rural Limestone County, numerous abandoned former sharecropper homes and abandoned farmsteads exhibit dilapidated housing conditions; such abandoned structures are testimony to changing agricultural technology and the resultant consolidation of numerous farmer family owned farming units. These abandoned structures have for the most part been "written off" the local housing market by realtors and owners due to their poor structural conditions.

These concentrations, however, are extremely scattered, and do not lend themselves to a housing rehabilitation program, using "concentrations" as a base for rehabilitation. A countywide housing effort should correct this issue, though.

Renter-Occupied Housing Lacking One or More Plumbing Facilities According to the 1980 Census of Housing, a house lacking one more plumb-ing facilities does not have one or more of the following: private flush 84

TABLE I V - 9 REGIONAL HOUSING UNITS BY TENURE, OCCUPANCY AND PLUMBING FACILITIES, 1980 LIMESTONE D e K a l b Jackson Limestone Athens Limes t o n e Madison Mars ha1 1 TARCOG T o t a l C i t y "Rural "

T o t a l U n i t s

• U n i t s Lacking**

Occupied U n i t s m

cn U n i t s Lacking Owner Units Lacking Renter U n i t s Lacking Vacant U n i t s

• U n i t s Lacking 20,888 1, 2 9 3 19,247 893 15, 010 4 31 4, 237 462 1, 6 4 1 400 18,620 1, 250 17,689 905 13,200 410 4,489 4 95 1, 931 34 5 16,497 1,068 1 5, 358 809 11, 321 3 31 4,037 478 1, 139 260 5, 598 155 5, 287 120 3,406 46 1, 881 74 310 35 10,899 91 3 10,071 689 7, 915 285 2, 156 404 829 225 71, 040 1,344 67, 082 1, 0 2 3 44, 800 375 22, 282 64 8 3,958 321 25, 716 937 23,489 563 1 7, 604 269 5, 885 2 94 2,227 374 153,761 5,893 142,865 4,192 101, 935 1,816 40,930 2,377 10,896 1, 7 0 1 Year Round U n i t s

• • Lacking one or more plumbing facilities.

SOURCE:

U. S. Census of P o p u l a t i o n and Housing, 1980.

Summary Tape F i l e l A., 1982.

TABLE I

T 3

REGIONAL HOUSING UNITS LACKING PLUMBING FACILITIES PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY OCCUPANCY AND TENURE B Y JURISDICTION, 1980 LIMESTONE T o t d l

" Rural "

D e k l b J a c k s o n Limestone Athens Limestone Madison M a r s h a l l TARCCG

-n:nl U n i t s

• 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 100.0 1 0 0. 0 100.0 1 0 0. 0 100.0 1 0 0. 0

.-cupled U n i t s 6 9. 1 72.4 75.7 77.4 75.5 76.1 60.1 7 1. 1

.*Tier 3 3. 3 32.8 31.0 29.7 31.2 27.9 28.7 30.8

?.enter 35.8 39.6 44.7 47.7 4 4. 3 48.2 31.4 40.3

':dCdn t Unl tS '

30.9 27.6 24.3 2 2. 6 24.5 23.9 39.9 2 8. 9

• Year Found U n i t s Note-totals May N o t Add Due t o Rounding SOVRCE:

U. S. Census of P o p u l a t i o n a n d Housing, 1980 S u m r y Tape F i l e l a., 1982.

TABLE Iv-11 PERCENTAGE OF FZGIONAL HOUSING UNITS LACKING PLUMBING FACILITIE BY TENURE AND OCCUPANCY BY JURISDICTION - 1980 LIMESTONE

,.Rural,.

2.80 8.40 1.89 3.64 3.83 5.17 T o t a l DeKalb J a c k s o n Limestone Athens L l n e s t o n e Madison H d r s h a l l Alabama T o t a l U n i t s

• 6. 1 9 6.37 6. 4 8 X c u p i e d U n i t s 4.64 5.12 5.27

2. 30 6. 8 0 1. 5 2 2.40 2.93 4.20 3. 6 C 0.84 1. 5 3 1. 7 8 2. 9 1 1 8. 7 0 2. 9 1 5.00 5.81 7.72 11.30 27.10 e. 11 16.79 15.61 17.30 h e r 2.87 3.11 2.92 1.40 Renter 1 0. 9 0 11.03 11.84 3.90 VdCdnt UnlCS*

24.38 17.87 22.83

• Year Round U n i t s

• L a c k i n g o n e or more plumbing f a c i l i t i e s.

Uoce:

T o t a l s May N o t Add Due to Roundlng SOURCE:

U. S. Census of P o p u l a t i o n and Housinq. 1980 Summary Tape F i l e 1 A. 1982 86

TABLE I V - 1 2 "SUBSTANDARD/CROWDED" HOUSING UNITS BY TENURE, NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY JURISDICTION AND REGION LIMESTONE T o t a l

'I Rura 1 De Kalb Jackson Limes t o n e Athens Limestone Madison Marshall TARCOG A l a b a m a 1,341,856 T o t a l U n i t s

• 19,247 17,689 15,358 5,287 10,071 67,082 23, 489 142,865 Owner 15,010 13,200 11,321 3,406 7,915 44,800 17,604 101,935 941,219 Renter 4,237 4,489 4,037 1, 881 2,156 22,282 5, 885 40, 930 400,637 1. 0 1 o r more p e r s o n s Per Room 03

.I T o t a l U n i t s

• 775 723 82 6 180 64 6 2,621 8 54 5,929 72,668 Renter 281 200 369 96 273 I, 502 365 2,847 35,323 Owner 4 94 523 457 84 373 1,119 489 3, 082 37, 345 PERCENTAGE T o t a l U n i t s

• 0 Owner R e n t e r 4.03 4.09 5.38 3.40 6.41 3.91 3.64 4.15 5.42 3.29 3.96 4.04 2.47 4.71 2.50 2.78 3.02 3.97 6.63 4.46 9.14 5.10 12.66 6.74 6.20 6.96 8.82

• Occupied U n i t s SOURCE:

U.S. Census of P o p u l a t i o n and Housing, 1980 Summary Tape F i l e l a., 1982

t o i l e t, h o t piped w a t e r, and p r i v a t e bath.

Within t h e TARCOG region, a high proportion of housing lacked one o r more of these e s s e n t i a l plumbing f a c i l i t i e s.

Among the renter-occupied u n i t s, those occupied by Blacks had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher percentage without one o r more plumbing f a c i l i t i e s.

According t o t h e 1980 Census of Housing, 35 percent of a l l r e n t a l u n i t s occupied by Blacks i n Limestone County lacked one o r more plumbing f a c i l i t i e s.

While the t o t a l popu-l a t i o n fared somewhat better, a high percentage of a l l occupied housing lacked one o r more plumbing facilities.

The percentage of t o t a l occupied r e n t a l u n i t s lacking one or more plumbing f a c i l i t i e s i n Limestone County w a s 8.8 percent com-pared t o 35.9 f o r Blacks.

It can be assumed t h a t almost a l l housing u n i t s t h a t lack a p r i v a t e t o i l e t, hot piped water, or p r i v a t e bath should be considered t o be substandard.

Owner-Occupied Housing Units Lacking One o r More Plumbing F a c i l i t i e s I n every TARCOG county, a much smaller percentage of owner-occupied housing More than four t i m e s the percentage of Black owner-occupied u n i t s u n i t s lacked one o r m o r e plumbing f a c i l i t i e s than w a s t h e case with renter-oc-cupied u n i t s.

lacked on o r more plumbing f a c i l i t i e s than w a s t h e case with t o t a l occupied u n i t s.

i n t h i s respect w a s generally g r e a t e r f o r owner-occupied u n i t s than f o r renter-occupied u n i t s.

one o r more plumbing f a c i l i t i e s i n Limestone County w a s 3.0 percent compared t o 14.0 percent f o r Blacks.

The gap between the Black population and t h e t o t a l county population The percentage of t o t a l owner-occupied housing u n i t s lacking Limestone County's g r e a t e r share of u n i t s without indoor plumbing can be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e existence of a large proportion of r u r a l housing not y e t served by r u r a l o r community water systems.

The expansion of u t i l i t i e s i n t h i s county should provide more opportunities f o r the provision of more indoor plumbing fa-c i l i t i e s.

Overcrowding A s a general guide, housing u n i t s with more than one person per room are considered overcrowded.

Within the TARCOG Region, overcrowding i n Black occupied housing u n i t s w a s f a r i n excess of t h a t found i n a l l housing u n i t s.

The per-centage of overcrowding f o r a l l u n i t s i n Limestone County w a s 5.4 compared to 4.2 percent f o r t h e Region and 16.7 percent f o r Black housing.

HOUSINGl NEEDS I n order t o accurately a s c e r t a i n the present and f u t u r e need f o r housing throughout Limestone County, an analysis of the e x i s t i n g housing stock and population needing housing has been made.

the following paragraphs.

These f a c t o r s w i l l be reviewed i n Growth of t h e economic base, not only i n Limestone County i t s e l f b u t i n neighboring Huntsville and Decatur, should propel the county's population l e v e l from 46,005 i n 1980 t o 50,400 i n 1990.

The number of people l i v i n g i n group q u a r t e r s is high here primarily because of the several hundred dormitory residents a t Athens College.

Households i n 1990 should reach 20,700.

By the 88

c year 2000, the county's population and households w i l l t o t a l 65,000 and 24,074, respectively.

Household s i z e i n Limestone County has dropped from 3.26 persons i n 1970 It is anticipated t o drop t o 2.70 by 1990, and t o remain a t to 2.99 i n 1980.

t h i s level through the year 2000.

to be 20,070 (population i n households, divided by persons per household).

Eight'hundred and twenty-nine vacant houses, also a p a r t of the housing stock, r a i s e s the t o t a l housing inventory i n 1990 t o approximately 20,899.

1990 should witness a t o t a l housing inventory of 20,899 houses; and by the year 2000, Limestone County's t o t a l housing inventory should approximate 24,974 units.

The number of households i n 1990 is projected The year HOUSING PROBLEMS The basic f a c t to be acknowledged concerning housing i n Limestone County is t h a t the national goal of a "decent home i n a suitable living environment" has not been f u l f i l l e d f o r a l l families.

There a r e, and have been, insufficient opportunities f o r t h i s ideal t o be accomplished a t prices many people can af-ford.

The majority of the county residents l i v e i n well-maintained housing u n i t s of ample s i z e i n sound condition.

A t the same time, there have been and s t i l l a r e severe housing problems f o r c e r t a i n groups of people.

These include r a c i a l minorities, welfare r e c i p i e n t s, and other poor people--the young, the elderly, and the large family of l o w o r moderate income.

Current forecasts indicate t h a t by the year 2000 there w i l l be 65,000 people living i n the county needing a t o t a l of approximately 24,900 dwelling units.

I n addition to ameliorating existing housing problems, a major challenge t o the county is the manner i n which housing and i t s r e l a t e d environment is t o be provided f o r the f u t u r e population.

For the convenience of description, the primary problems a r e labeled:

Economic--An i n s u f f i c i e n t supply of housing f o r low-and moderate-income households.

Social--Poverty and discrimhnation.

Physical--The needs of an increasing population.

ECONOMIC PROBLEMS:

AN INSUFFICIENT SUPPLY OF HOUSING FOR LOW-AND MODERATE-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS Housina Price The prices f o r housing are normally s e t i n the context of a market with prices paid f o r new housing establishing levels f o r prices of used housing.

89

I 1

Developers produce housing f o r consumer markets where they d e t e c t a demand t o which they respond, as a r e s u l t of such demand, development of a r e s i d e n t i a l nature w i l l probably occur eastward from Athens toward west-central Huntsville and toward t h e Huntsville/Madison County Jetplex.

During t h e current decade, an additional 5,300 u n i t s w i l l comprise the demand f o r new housing i n Limestone County, and t h e decade 1990-2000 w i l l witness y e t an a d d i t i o n a l demand f o r 4,350 new u n i t s on a countywide basis.

This projected demand takes i n t o con-sideration expected l o s s e s i n county housing stock, due t o d e t e r i o r a t i o n,

natural d i s a s t e r, and o t h e r expected but unforeseen occurrences.

DEMAND: BY: TENANCY The s h i f t toward g r e a t e r home ownership is q u i t e strong i n Limestone County.

Using p a s t trends, it has been projected t h a t t h e proportion of families owning t h e i r own homes shows t h i s expected change i n tenancy.

During t h e decade 1980-1990, t h e percentage of homeowners t o t o t a l resi-dents w i l l rise t o approximately 80 percent, and t h i s trend should s t a b i l i z e throughout t h e next decade.

Between 1980 and 1990, new housing u n i t s should be suddivided between owner and r e n t a l u n i t s a s follows: 3,900 and 1,400.

The market f o r the decade 1990-2000 is projected t o include approximately 3,480 owner-occupied u n i t s (including mobile homes) and 870 r e n t a l u n i t s.

DEMAND: BY PRICE RANGE Median family income i n Limestone County is $16,252 per year, s l i g h t l y above the maximum income l e v e l f o r admission i n t o p u b l i c housing f o r a family of s i x.

In addition, t h e minority population is quite l a r g e, and since most of the Black families have very low incomes, a s u b s t a n t i a l proportion of the county's housing demand is t h e low-cost housing f i e l d.

Limestone County's median family income compares unfavorably with t h e United States median ($19,928),

Alabama median ($16,353) and the TARCOG region median ($16,825).

During the decade 1980 to 1990, s u b s t a n t i a l new economic development, such as the General Motors P l a n t, should a s s i s t i n s u b s t a n t i a l l y lowering the proportion of the low-income housing market i n the county.

However, t h i s m a r -

k e t w i l l, nevertheless, remain an i n t e g r a l and important p a r t of the Limestone County housing market.

middle-income and higher-income markets would r i s e somewhat.

These trends should a l l s t a b i l i z e through t h e next decade, 1990 t o 2000.

The moderate income market would s t a b i l i z e and the PHYSICAL PROBLEMS:

AN I N C m A S I N G POPULATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ARE PRESENT-I N G PROBLEMS I N AFFORDING AN ADEQUATE LIVING ENVIRONMENT FOR NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS.

Growth Generation Limestone County's growth p a t t e r n has t r a d i t i o n a l l y witnessed urban awth i n and around Athens and, t o a lesser extent, i n t h e remaining municipalities i n the county.

However, various public and p r i v a t e investments have now directed I

90

TABLE I V - 1 3 POPULATION, HOUSING UNIT ESTIMATES, 1985, 1990 P o p u l a t i o n 1985 1990 P o p u l a t i o n 1985 1990 P o p u l a t i o n 1985 1990 D e K a l b 60,000 56, 000 2.6679 2.5479 22,490 25,511 23,076 Jackson 56, 000 61, 000 2.7634 2.6434 20, 265 Limestone 50, 000 56, 000 2.8455 2.7055 1 7, 572 2,070 Madison 213,500 230,000 2.7362 2.5350 78, 028 90,730 Marshal 1 70,000 75, 000 2.7000 2.5825 TARCOG 449,500 4 8 4 I 500 2.7362 2.5757 164, 2 8 1 188, 106 25,926

' 29,014 SOURCE: TARCOG P r o j e c t i o n s based on U.S. Census 1970 and 1980 and S t a t e of Alabama, Department of P u b l i c Health, B i r t h, Death and F e r t i l i t y tables, 1980.

c new urban growth i n t o t h e 1-65/U.S. 31 corridor and encouraged new r e s i d e n t i a l growth i n a north-south p a t t e r n from Pryor north to Elkmont.

Second, the four-laning of U.S. 72 (Huntsville-Athens) and A l a b a m a 20 (Huntsville-Decatur) have both i n i t i a t e d an east-west and northeast-southwest r e s i d e n t i a l growth p a t t e r n i n the southeastern quadrant of the county.

The combination of the above t h r e e patterns, o r corridors of growth form a triangular p a t t e r n i n Limestone and western Madison Counties, enclosed by U.S. 31, U.S. 72, and Alabama 20.

Im-proved access along A l a b a m a routes 53 and 251 have caused y e t another exurban r e s i d e n t i a l growth p a t t e r n i n t h e northeastern p a r t of t h e county.

I n each of these cases, new r e s i d e n t i a l development has occurred without t h e b e n e f i t of adequate water and s e w e r service. During the l a s t four years (1979-19831, Lime-stone County has heavily invested i n r u r a l w a t e r systems designed t o serve these high growth p o t e n t i a l areas.

9.

However, the provision of adequate housing w i l l continue t o be d i f f i c u l t without the provision of necessary public service support f a c i l i t i e s i n the form of w a t e r, sewer, f i r e protection, and s o l i d waste disposal.

Virtually every one of these support services are inadequate i n unincorporated areas, and these services w i l l need t o be strengthened i n order f o r new housing t o develop i n an environment conducive t o sound housing development.

The proposed new communities near Elkmont represent f u t u r e growth poten-t i a l i n north-central Limestone County.

The county w i l l need t o d r a s t i c a l l y upgrade services i n t h i s area before t h i s growth p o t e n t i a l can take place.

Substandard Housing There are 10,071 housing u n i t s i n Limestone County outside the City of Athens.

Of these 10,071 u n i t s, 854 u n i t s, o r 8.5 percent, are dilapidated.

There are 3,859 u n i t s, o r 38.3 percent, i n some stage of d e t e r i o r a t i n g condi-tion.

The remaining 5,358 u n i t s, o r 53.2 percent, are i n sound condition.

It is obvious t h a t a substantial number of u n i t s i n Limestone County are substan-dard t o some degree---46.8 percent.

This percentage of substandard u n i t s com-pared unfavorably with regional, state, and nationwide statistics.

This large percentage of substandard housing represents a p o t e n t i a l massive r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and clearance e f f o r t needed before s u b s t a n t i a l progress can be made i n improving housing conditions i n Limestone County.

HOUSING

-OBSTACLES Solutions t o t h e housing problems i n Limestone County w i l l be found as prob-

&ems are faced.

The supply of housing f o r the e l d e r l y and low-income house-holds must be increased, the burden of poverty needs t o be relieved, the range of housing choice expanded t o a l l persons, and p r i v a t e and public e f f o r t s need t o be mobilized and d i r e c t e d.

Some solutions t o these problems may be e f f e c t i v e l y pursued by resources within the County of Limestone, while o t h e r s are more s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t e d a t regional, state, and national levels.

It should a l s o be acknowledged t h a t solutions t o the housing and housing-related problems of poverty are found i n t h e treatment of symptoms r a t h e r than cure or prevention.

92

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

There are t w o major areas of economic obstacles.

M o s t important is the r i s i n g c o s t of housing.

The current high i n t e r e s t r a t e s and the r i s i n g c o s t of land and construction v i r t u a l l y eliminates the p o s s i b i l i t y of a low-o r moderate-income family being able to a f f o r d a home.

In addition, present state usury l a w s do not allow i n t e r e s t rates t o be set a t com-p e t i t i v e levels f o r conventional mortgages.

The second major economic obstacle is t h e present shortage of federal funds.

The A l a b a m a Housing Finance Authority is making headway i n providing below-market i n t e r e s t rate financing f o r areas meeting chronic economic d i s t r e s s standards.

Substantial areas of r u r a l Limestone County do m e e t these standards.

Inadequate family income i s a major obstacle t o securing standard housing not only i n Limestone County, but i n most counties i n the United States.

According to t h e 1980 U.S. Census of Housing, 2,224 families o r 17.2 per-cent of the t o t a l i n the county had annual incomes under the federally designed poverty level.

An additional 6,318 families o r 48.4 percent had annual incomes under $16,000.

Many of these families a r e e l d e r l y,

l i v i n g where t h e heads of households are unable t o f i n d adequate employ-ment because of l o w educational levels.

There is a c u r r e n t shortage of l o c a l mortgage financing sources seriously r e s t r i c t i n g l o c a l developments.

The Alabama Housing Finance Authority is mitigating t h i s s i t u a t i o n, t o a degree.

Local, state, and f e d e r a l funds f o r comprehensive planning and implemen-t a t i o n are inadequate t o permit the county and t h e region t o formulate adequate programs.

This is t r u e, not only with respect t o controlling standards of new development, but a l s o with r e s p e c t t o eliminating sub-standard l i v i n g conditions and providing standard dwelling u n i t s.

Present state l e g i s l a t i o n does not provide permissive authority t o coun-ties such as Limestone t o formally undertake the following endeavors:

county planning (via a Planning Commission), land use controls, and building and housing codes.

Each one of these endeavors can assist i n promoting both high q u a l i t y new housing, and i n protecting e x i s t i n g high q u a l i t y r e s i d e n t i a l areas.

Limestone County government is denied the use of these programs simply because counties do not have permissive l e g i s l a t i o n authorizing t h e i r use f o r unincorporated areas.

The S t a t e,

however, does now allow counties t o enact subdivision controls and flood-prone areas land use controls.

Public s e r v i c e s f o r growth areas i n Limestone County are substandard contrasted t o the rate of new growth occurring i n these areas.

The appearance of substandard housing throughout Limestone County repre-s e n t s both a v i s u a l and psychological negative d e t e r r a n t t o new investments i n standard housing.

i n these areas--another obstacle t o the construction o r improvement of housing i n Limestone County.

Property values have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been depressed There is no continually maintained information center i n Limestone County on opportunities f o r low-and moderate-income housing resources.

Despite 93

the demand for such housing, as stated in this housing element, the low incomes of such residents preclude them from utilizing the conventional owner or rental market.

Developers, realtors, and financial institutions have particularly criti-cal needs for up-to-date information.

housin-q information. There is an urgent need to improve the quality and quantity of useful housing information reaching low income households on available housing, housing programs, and financial aids which are avail-able -

Consumers are important users of OBJECTIVES The first step in solving the housing problem in Limestone County is the The county's planning program is concerned establishment of objectives followed by the formulation of some means of achieving the desired objectives.

with the future of the county-its environment, its economy, and above all, the welfare of its people. The objectives selected or the County Housing Element provide the basic framework for the solution of the county's housing problems.

The county's primary objective in housing is the provision of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for all its residents. While this objective is understand-ably a long-range goal, the specific objectives used to arrive at the overall goal are discussed below:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Upgrade the capacity of Limestone County residents to improve their own housing through an increased standard of living.

program for improving the income level in Limestone County be expanded.

Improving local employment opportunities and increasing the educational level are essential if any housing programs are to have a permanent effect.

It is necessary that a Expand the choice in housing.

ditional single family housing units, particularly three and four bedroom units.

Encourage local developers to construct ad-Eliminate further deterioration of the county's existing housing supply.

Enact a housing code and use possible special revenue sharing funds for housing and community development. Local implementation of this measure will first take legislative action, via either a statewide or local bill.

Increase the number of low-cost housing units. Encourage local developers to build low cost housing.

Make available public utilities and services to all growth areas of the county.

utilized to their greatest potential, adequate public facilities and services must be provided. These services should be emphasized, parti-cularly, in the new communities area near Ellanont.

In order that available housing sites in Limestone County are 94

I 8

I I

I I

1 I

I I

1 1

I I

i i

I I

I c

6.

Eliminate all dilapidated dwelling units in the county. Greater emphasis should be placed on the removal of all dilapidated dwelling units. First priority should be given to vacant units.

7.

Increase mortgage sources for all income levels in Limestone County.

Needed mortgage monies are presently in scarce supply countywide. New manufacturing companies such as Gmeral Motors could provide a revolving fund for its employees in local lending institutions. This activity could significantly supplement the state mortgage bond program.

STATEMENT

'OF

'PLANNING 'ACTIVITIES PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIVITIES Although Limestone County has not previously engaged in comprehensive planning before FY 1974, 1975, the county had prepared an areawide water and sewer plan through funding provided by the Fanners Home Administration.

activity was undertaken in the late 1960's. In addition, Limestone County has been an active member of the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments since TARCOG's inception in 1969; and as a result, the county has been incllrEe5 in the regional planning program.

This CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES The Limestone County Commission is presently in the process of develosing a planning program with technical assistance provided by the Top of Alabami?

Regional Council of Governments.

the Comprehensive Plan. This Plan, amends, and refines the 1976 Comprehensive Plan.

Planning activities currently underway ir,clude FUTURE PLANNING ACTIVITIES In the near future, as indicated by the dates provided, the followinc planning activities of interest to housing are to be undertaken:

Activity Year Estimated C o s t Economic Development Plan Continue Housing Program Land Use Controls Subdivision Regulations Continue Housing Program 1984-1985 1985-1986 1986-1987 1986-1987 1986-1987

$16, OCO 4,000 6, 000 4, 000 10, 000

c In the preceding years, the following actions have been undertaken i n Limestone County t o provide additional housing and a l l e v i a t e housing problems.

1.

Constructed rural-water systems to serve r u r a l r e s i d e n t i a l areas; East Limestone, Tanner, Belle Mina, Fort Hampton, and North Limestone.

2.

Constructed 53 dwelling u n i t s for low income and elderly residents (Top of Alabama Regional Housing Authority).

3.

Constructed community f i r e departments (Clements, South Limestone, Plea-sant Grove, Elkmont, Owens, and E a s t Limestone areas f o r r u r a l residen-t i a l a r e a s ).

FUTURE IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS /

Future actions a r e necessary t o meet the objectives of t h i s sCudy and a r e designed t o a l l e v i a t e housing problems and overcome-obstacles to the solution of these problems.

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

I I

II I

I I

1 CHAPTER 5 COMMUNITY FAGILlTlES As an integral part of the Comprehensive Plan, the Cornmunib] Facilities Plan has as its objective the programming of the capital-level public se-vices to serve the resident population of the county through the planning seriod.

Since the County Commission is the only available source of public service at the local level in unincorporated areas, the Community Facilities P l a will emphasize the need or county-level services to such areas.

will also recognize the need for countywide involvement by the Count:J Govern-ment regarding policies directed at guiding countywide growth, develo?nent, ane environmental protection.

However, tie Plan Services provided countywide by County government include t3.e fsilowing:

1.

County administration

2.

County Sheriff (civil papers and court administration)

3.

4.

County Courts

5.

Health and Social Services County Tax Collection and Assessment Services provided primarily to residents in the unincorporazed aress in-clude :

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Water Service Sewer Service Fire Protection County Sheriff (road patrols; includes Mooresville and Lesrsr)

Library Service County Highways County Schools Parks (in conjunction with municipal parks)

The Community Facilities Plan will analyze the needs of cocnzy 2 7. k l i ~

services for two time periods, short-range (1982-1990) and long-range (1991-2 0 0 0 ).

These two periods comprise the total planning period for the Ccm2re-hensive Plan. Each function is analyzed as follows:

COUNTY

'ADMINISTRATION The County of Limestone administers county services from tkee najor fa-cilities both located in the county seat, Athens. The Courthousi E.:Ll<hq on 97

Courthouse Square i n downtown Athens is the o r i g i n a l county administrative fa-c i l i t y.

1978.

Constitutional and some s t a t u t o r y o f f i c e s (excepting t h e County Commis-sion) a r e administered herein.

This f a c i l i t y, being recently renovated, is i n adequate condition, and should remain so f o r the foreseeable future.

However, there is no o f f - s t r e e t parking space available a t t h i s f a c i l i t y.

This s t r u c t u r e w a s constructed i n 1918 and refurbished i n 1939 and The second administrative s t r u c t u r e used by t h e county is the Limestone County Courthouse Annex.

This f a c i l i t y w a s b u i l t i n 1966 t o r e l i e v e acute overcrowding of o f f i c e s i n t h e old Courthouse.

The new building is located a t Jefferson and Green S t r e e t s.

This building houses t h e S h e r i f f ' s 2nd C i v i l Defense Department (and j a i l ), and the water and education boards as w e l l a s several smaller, non-constitutional agencies.

Off-street parking, and building conditions i s adequate f o r the foreseeable future.

The t h i r d administrative s t r u c t u r e u t i l i z e d by the county i s the Washington S t r e e t annex, located on the north side of Washington S t r e e t, w e s t of Jefferson Street.

This building, renovated i n 1981 from its p r i o r use as t;?e Athens main post o f f i c e, houses t h e County Commission o f f i c e, county engineering o f f i c e, and data processing functions, a s w e l l as data storage.

This recently-renovated s t r u c t u r e is adequate f o r the foreseeable future, and a l s o has adequate off-s t r e e t parking space.

Please r e f e r t o t h e chart depicting county government organization f o r location of agencies r e l a t i v e t o the County Commission.

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S ( 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 9 0

1.

Off-street parking f o r t h e County Courthouse (the o r i g i n a l ssat of Lime-stone County Government) should be provided; however, t h i s should be ac-complished i n cooperation with the c i t y and downtown property owners, i n conjunction with long-range plans f o r the City of Athens Dor-town Area Revitalization Program (Athens City Planner).

2.

Maintain current q u a l i t y f a c i l i t i e s v i a r e p a i r s, a s necesszr-.

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S ( 1 9 9 1 - 2 0 0 0 Since adequate room f o r building expansion e x i s t s a t t h e Anr.r,u number two site, t h i s s i t e should be used f o r any building additions t o the county ad-ministrative f a c i l i t i e s during t h i s segment of the planning pericc.

parking f a c i l i t i e s should be acquired a t the t i m e of any proposec additions.

Additional POLICIES

1.

A l l County administrative f a c i l i t i e s should be maintained i n c e n t r a l Athens since such f a c i l i t i e s should be readily available t o the public i n a c e n t r a l location.

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

1

2.

Additional county departments should be organized directly under the County Commission rather than through quasi-independent boards.

be followed where such a policy is not contrary to state legislation.

This policy should COUNTY SHRIFF'S DEPARTMENT The direct patrolling duties of the unincorporated areas of the county and the Towns of Mooresville and Lester is the responsibility of the Limestone County Sheriff's Department. The department's headquarters are located at the Court-house Annex. Manpower, including deputies and investigators, totals 37 personnel.

Estimates of need calculate an additional need for 6 deputies.

9, and estimates place the need for patrol cars at 6 vehicles. The State Public Safety Department places 5 state troopers on intermittent duty in Limestone County. These troopers are permanently stationed in Decatur. Jail facilities are considered adequate by local and state officials; however, one additional jailer is deemed needed locally. Booking space is also needed at the jail.

Limestone County Sheriff's vehicles and Athens City Police vehicles all have radio communication with their respective headquarters and with each other.

the Sheriff's Department has radio communications with the State Patrol at Decatur.

Patrol cars total In addition, STANDARDS

1.

One deputy per 2,000 population (inclusive of total county population.)

2.

One vehicle (radio equipped) per two deputies at a minimum, per one deputy preferred.

3.

Offices maintained in a central county location.

RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 9 0

1.

Employ an additional two deputies.

2.

Acquire an additional two radio-equipped vehicles.

3.

Reallocate office space in Sheriff's Department for additional booking space at the jail.

RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 9 1 - 2 0 0 0 )

1.

Any long-range approach to improving law enforcement in Limestone County would probably involve a separation of civil and criminal duties, either by establishing separate sections of the Sheriff's Department or by l i m i t -

ing the Sheriff's Department to civil duties and establishing a separate county-wide police department. The latter approach is becoming more popular in urbanizing counties. The police department would be responsi-ble only for criminal law enforcement. There are two basic alternatives:

99

a.

Expand the s h e r i f f ' s department t o two well-defined divisions; t h a t of c i v i l d u t i e s and t h a t of l a w enforcement.

b.

L i m i t the s h e r i f f ' s department t o c i v i l d u t i e s, and e s t a b l i s h a county-wide police department t o be responsible or p o l i c e protection throughout t h e county.

Employ additional personnel and acquire a d d i t i o n a l vehicles i n accordance with the following table:

This agency should be w e l l paid and w e l l trained.

2.

TABLE V-1 LIMESTONE COUNTY SHERIFF ' S DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL AND VEHICULAR NEEDS, 1985-2000 Additional Police Needed Additional Vehicles Needed 1985 1990 1995 2000 POLICIES The following p o l i c i e s are designed t o promote adequzte p o l i c e p r o t e c t i c n i n t h e planning area:

1.

Police headquarters should be located i n the center of t h e i r seyrice a r e a i n order t o enable rapid response.

2.

Training programs could be i n s t i t u t e d which would include Athens, EYaorc, Ardmore, and t h e Limestone County S h e r i f f ' s Office with a County CoorcZi-nator.

3.

Replace a l l vehicles a t 50,000 miles.

FIRE 'PROTECTION F i r e protection throughout Limestone County does not comprise t o t a l COVE-age.

and Elkmont i n addition t o nearby r u r a l o r suburban areas.

Limestone County maintains two trucks f o r r u r a l f i r e protection.

The remaining r u r a l f i r e prc-t e c t i o n offered Limestone County are the six r u r a l volunteer f i r e depzr'aents, established with the a s s i s t a n c e of the Alabama Forestry Commission and the C i v i l Defense Program.

Municipal f i r e departments service the c i t i e s and towns of Athens, >z&ore, Therefore, approximately 65 percent of the unincorsorated areas o f L h e -

stone County have no f i r e prbtection.

100

I I

1 I

I I

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

I I

I STANDARDS SOURCE:

American Insurance Association, Fire Department Standards Distribu-t i o n of Company Response t o Alarms--Changes e f f e c t i v e January, 1962 Special I n t e r e s t Bulletin No. 315; 85 John S t r e e t, New York, New York, January, 1963.

S T A T I O N F A C I L I T I E S

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

New f i r e s t a t i o n s should be designed with a minimum of two bays and should provide a l l necessary f a c i l i t i e s which would make it useable as a f u l l -

t i m e manned s t a t i o n.

For one-story building, the minimum area of the l o t and f l o o r should be:

a.

One company station--100 f e e t by 120 f e e t (approximately 3,660 square f e e t of f l o o r a r e a ).

b.

Two company stations--125 f e e t by 125 f e e t (approximately 4,750 square f e e t of f l o o r area).

c.

Three company station--180 f e e t by 125 f e e t (calculate floor area from actual requirements).

d. The area necessary t o handle one pumper is roughly 15 by 30 f e e t ; 15 by 55-60 f e e t f o r an a e r i a l ladder truck and u n i t ; and 15 by 45 f e e t for a Quad.

Hillside locations o r s i t e s located on a steep slope should be avoided.

The s t r e e t s onto which f i r e equipment are moved out should lead naturally across the community o r service area connecting the f i r e truck lane with a r t e r i e s and s t r e e t s going t o a l l directions of the service area covered by the f i r e s t a t i o n.

The immediate v i c i n i t y of a f i r e station should be c l e a r of land uses which make it d i f f i c u l t o r dangerous for quick use of f i r e equipment (e.g., auto parking i n close proximity t o f i r e s t a t i o n s heavily traveled, inaccessible one-way s t r e e t s, etc.)

Entrances onto a major thoroughfare for f i r e equipment should be provided with adequate signalization t o stop a l l t r a f f i c approaching the s t a t i o n,

insuring adequate response of f i r e equipment.

An area divided by natural or man-made b a r r i e r s (e.g., r i v e r s, bluffs, at-grade r a i l l i n e s, e t c. ) which present the p o s s i b i l i t y of delay might require additional s t a t i o n s t o provide adequate protection.

Fire s t a t i o n s should be designed so t h a t both ends of the building permit entrance and e x i t f o r f i r e apparatus.

Preferably the s t a t i o n s should be located near a major intersection of a r t e r i a l routes, thus providing for quick response t o any point within the service area covered by the f i r e station.

101 i

c

8.

F i r e s t a t i o n s should be designed so t h a t a separate bay is provided f o r ambulance o r l i f e squad equipment where needed.

TABLE V-2 FIRE FLOW (GPM)

NUMBER OF COMPANIES REQUIRED 2,000 GPM o r under*

pumper companies One company within l-% miles and 2 pumper companies within four m i l e s Ladder companies One company within two m i l e s

~~

~

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S ( 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 9 0 )

1.

2.

3.

4.

Based upon present urban growth patterns i n Limestone County, pumper com-panies ( 2 each) should be located i n the following communities i n the county:

a.

Lester-Salem

b.

Brown's Ferry

c.

Greenbrier

d.

Hays M i l l

e.

B e l l e Mina/North It is recommended t h a t a paid, fulltime f i r e marshall be appointed for Limestone County.

The f i r e marshall would coordinate a l l f i r e fighting and f i r e prevention a c t i v i t i e s within the county.

Specific duties would include :

a.

Aid i n the organization and development of r u r a l f i r e d i s t r i c t s.

b.

Make periodic inspections of a l l r u r a l departments.

c.

Implement t h e S t a t e Enabling Legislation or Limestone County.

d.

A c t as t r a i n i n g o f f i c e r f o r rural departments.

e.

Inspect public schools and other places of public gatherings.

Consideration should be given t o the provision of formal f i r e protection d i s t r i c t s based upon t h e areas denoted i n the'Recommendation N o. 1. The d i s t r i c t could provide t a x funds f o r the desired f a c i l i t i e s, materials, personnel, and s e r v i c e s, such a s t r a i n i n g, f i r e alarm and prevention.

Therefore, these d i s t r i c t s would be i n a position t o seek a 9 o r 8 American Insurance Association r a t i n g.

A countywide f i r e association should be organized t o a c t as a policy-making body.

102

RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 9 1 - 2 0 0 0

1.

A s growth continues i n Limestone County, additional s t a t i o n s comprising two companies each should be located i n the following communities:

a.

Thatch

b.

Johnson School c, Carey

2.

By 1990, a countywide alert system should be established which would provide f o r mutual a s s i s t a n c e between a l l municipalities and t h e r u r a l county system.

Calhoun Junior College should e s t a b l i s h a f i r e school similar t o t h a t which exists a t the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.

POLICIES

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

F i r e s t a t i o n s should be planned, programmed, and constructed; and f i r e services organized t o enable.the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of t h e countys f i r e de-fenses t o class 9 o r 8.

A l l i n d u s t r i a l areas and areas planned f o r intensive development should be within 1 3/4 m i l e f o r a f i r e s t a t i o n.

All r u r a l single-family r e s i d e n t i a l areas should be within four t r a v e l miles of a f i r e s t a t i o n.

F i r e s t a t i o n s should be located i n the center of t h e i r f i r e protection service areas.

F i r e s t a t i o n service areas should not be split by impassible barriers such as major thoroughfares and major. streams.

F i r e s t a t i o n s should be located near i n t e r s e c t i o n s of arterial highways where a l t e r n a t i v e response routes t o a l l p a r t s of t h e i r f i r e protection d i s t r i c t s e x i s t.

However, f i r e s t a t i o n s should not be located within 1,000 f e e t of major i n t e r s e c t i o n s where congestion is l i k e l y t o occur.

P r i o r i t y on t h e construction, equipping, and manning of f i r e s t a t i o n s i n the Limestone County Planning Area should occur i n t h e planned i n d u s t r i a l and urban density areas of the area.

COUNTY HIGHWAY The Limestone County Engineering Department whose headquarters are located i n the Courthouse Annex, services a t o t a l of 960 m i l e s of county roads.

O f t h i s 960 m i l e s, 850 m i l e s are paved and the remaining 110 m i l e s consists of e i t h e r gravel o r d i r t surface.

placed under the Federal Aid Secondary System.

This FAS system provides federal funds f o r t h e construction and reconstruction of county roads con-sidered l o c a l l y t o be c o l l e c t o r routes (providing connections from r u r a l areas Of the 850 m i l e s of paved roads, 135 m i l e s are 10 3

t o state and federal r o u t e s ). These FAS roads a r e numbered by the county, other county routes e i t h e r have road names o r a r e unnamed.

numbering o r naming system e x i s t s, but one is being implemented.

N o t r u l y countywide road Maintenance and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s f o r a l l county vehicles are located a t the county repair shop a t Athens.

However, operating c r e w s report t o four d i f -

ferent f i e l d locations, one i n each of the four County Commissioner's d i s t r i c t s.

A s funds allow, each Commissioner can pave roads, buy equipment, and employ work crews.

A s a matter of policy, the County Engineering Department Director is consulted on major decisions, such as road paving p r i o r i t i e s and c a p i t a l equip-ment expenditures.

The maintenance of four d i f f e r e n t equipment and work loca-t i o n s is favored l o c a l l y since services can then be rendered m o r e quickly through-out t h e county, as opposed t o a c e n t r a l garage f o r a l l operations.

Limestone County maintains a much higher percentage of paved roads contrasted w i t h other r u r a l counties.

RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 9 0

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Even though several s u b f a c i l i t i e s are needed throughout the county f o r d i r e c t maintenance, the t o t a l road maintenance system should be coordinated as a u n i t by t h e Department Director.

A yearly road paving program should be continued as a program budget by t h e County Commission.

This yearly budget by t h e County Commission should be developed from a three-year short-range program.

The r a t i o of employees t o equipment should be increased toward a one-to-one b a s i s so t h a t t h e present equipment does not remain i d l e.

Minimum road width and drainage standards should be established f o r t h e poiicy of accepting new roads i n t o t h e county system.

Forty-foot roadway widths with six-inch bases, surface paving, and s i x t y f o o t rights-of-way are recommended as t h e b a s i s upon which t o famulate minimum s t r e e t acceptance standards.

County subdivision regulations should be enforced by the County Cammission.

These regulations w i l l provide f o r the provision of public services, such as u t i l i t i e s.

Such standards could be based upon existing regulations i n force by t h e City of Athens.

S t a t e l e g i s l a t i o n has been passed i n order f o r a l l counties t o adopt and enforce such regulations.

A five-year program of equipment purchases should be established and a yearly purchasing reserve budget developed from t h i s five-year program.

A countywide road numbering o r naming system should be established and coordinated with adjacent counties.

RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 9 1 - 2 0 0 0 )

1.

Maintain and update five-year program f o r purchases.

104

c

2.

Maintain l e v e l of road maintenance commensurate with mileage of paved and unpaved roads.

POLICIES

1.

Minimum standards f o r road maintenance used f o r FAS roads should be used f o r a l l county roads.

2.

County roads serving only one resident (dead-end) o r open land only should be reverted t o t h e property owner.

3.

A l l areas not within 3.r m i l e s of a paved road should be served with paved roads f i r s t before adjacent areas a r e served.

4.

A l l subdivision streets should be required t o be paved before acceptance by t h e county.

' REFUSE

-COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL Refuse c o l l e c t i o n and disposal is a problem today regardless of whether people l i v e i n a r u r a l o r urban area.

as the individual and continual disregard on the p a r t of e i t h e r w i l l c e r t a i n l y r e s u l t i n unnecessary environmental problems and annoyances.

standing, carelessness and indifference is l a r g e l y responsible f o r many of our present problems.

Frequently, individual e f f o r t is wasted without public con-t r o l ; b u t a t the same t i m e, e f f o r t s of public agencies are doomed t o follow without support of individual c i t i z e n s.

This is a problem of t h e community a s well Lack of under-I n t h e o v e r a l l environmental picture of Limestone County, the problem is how t o handle our present estimated volume of 34,000 tons of refuse produced annually.

By t h e year 2000, t h i s amount w i l l increase t o 50,000 tons.

INVENTORY There are three methods of refuse c o l l e c t i o n, a l l of which are i n use i n Limestone County: 1) by t h e individual, 2 ) by p r i v a t e contract c o l l e c t o r s who a r e paid by the individual receiving the service, and 3 ) by a governmental agency using public funds.

Refuse disposal is normally accomplished by 1) the individual who u t i l i z e s h i s own land o r disposal areas belonging t o p r i v a t e o r public agencies, o r 2 ) by governmental agencies who u t i l i z e publicly owned dis-posal areas.

Limestone County and t h e City of Athens j o i n t l y maintain the city-owned The county licenses p r i v a t e haulers who provide waste l a n d f i l l of 69 acres.

collection service.

These haulers a r e assessed a f e e by the county, and t h i s f e e is given t o the City of Athens f o r use i n l a n d f i l l equipment purchases.

The Tri-County Health Department has closed open dumps i n Limestone County and a l l haulers are required t o use t h e l a n d f i l l o r another method of disposal ap-proved by the Health Deparment.

t o s o i l waste c o l l e c t i o n and disposal.

The county has not adopted ordinances related 105

N o longer is the old-fashioned, unsanitary refuse dump acceptable i n today's society as a means of refuse disposal.

According t o the State Solid Waste D i s -

posal A c t of 1971, t h e only acceptable means of disposal i n the State w i l l be e i t h e r a sanitary l a n d f i l l, o r a l t e r n a t e methods meeting ADEM.(Solid Wastewater Division) requirements.

The problem of developing an adequate r e f u s e disposal program i n LimesLone County is compounded by 1) the county's present low population density, 2 ) the lack of a v a i l a b l e funds, and 3 ) t h e f a c t t h a t development is taking place simultaneously i n southern Limestone adjacent t o Decatur and i n eastern Lime-stone which is beginning t o f e e l the e f f e c t s of its proximity t o Huntsville and i n c e n t r a l Limestone near Athens.

Based on the f a c t o r s of projected population growth, annual production of 1,500 pounds of refuse per person and four acres of l a n d f i l l per 10,000 popula-t i o n per year, the' following land requirements f o r Limestone County w e r e devel-oped z TABLE V-3 SANITARY LANDFILL REQUIREMENTS LIMESTONE COUNTY, 1982-2000 Planning Period Acres Needed 1982-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 28.7 30.3 31.9 13.5 104.4 Total SOURCE; U.S. Public Health Service, Environmental Health Planning Guide, 1962.

RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 9 0 )

T o p r o t e c t the h e a l t h of the people and t o prevent the depreciation of the county's environment, the following plan for storage, c o l l e c t i o n, and disposal of refuse is recommended;

1.

Limestone County should acquire one c e n t r a l l y located s i t e s u f f i c i e n t f o r the purpose of serving t h e urbanizing a r e a (recommended s i z e, 50-75 a c r e s ).

I n addition, several smaller s i t e s (5 acre minimum) should be acquired t o serve the r u r a l a r e a s of the county.

These smaller sites would be served by a c i r c u i t r i d e r.

I f properly planned, the l a r g e r site could be u t i l i z e d a s a f u t u r e recreation f a c i l i t y.

The Athens l a n d f i l l could con-tinue t o be used as a c e n t r a l f a c i l i t y provided it is expanded t o handle countywide waste needs i n the future.

106

2.

Limestone County should adopt an ordinance t o require a l l householders and commercial establishments t o provide containers approved by the Health Department.

3.

It is recommended t h a t house-to-house collection be l e f t t o private enter-p r i s e and disposal a t l a n d f i l l sites t o be the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the home-owner.

The p r i v a t e agencies, however, should continue t o be regulated as is the present case.

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S ( 1 9 9 1 - 2 0 0 0

1.

Limestone County should consider the expansion of needed l a n d f i l l sites based upon t h e standards and T a b l e included i n t h e section preceding Recommendations.

2.

The c i r c u i t r i d e r system should be expanded concurrently with the need f o r expanded l a n d f i l l sites.

POLICIES

1.

Reuse of l a n d f i l l s i t e f o r recreation use i f s o i l s w i l l allow such reuse.

2.

Develop s a n i t a t i o n budget on both a l i n e i t e m and objective (program) budget.

3.

Policy f o r extension of service:

TABLE V-4 SERVICE ECONOMIC POPULATION DENSITY EQUIVALENT LOT SIZE JUSTIFICATION Over 2,500 persons/

L e s s than 1 acre J u s t i f i e d 1,000-2,500 persons/

1 t o 2 acres Probably J u s t i f i e d 500-1,000 persons/

L e s s than 500 persons/

Over 4 acres Rarely J u s t i f i e d square m i l e square m i l e square m i l e 2 t o 4 acres Not Normally J u s t i f i e d square m i l e EDUCATION The education of t h e children of any county is the l a r g e s t single i t e m of public expense.

Considering t h e complexity of today's modern society, :the 107

public educational system has a pronounced function t o perform f o r every c h i l d i n the county.

Without adequate formal training, employment opportunities are limited and the opportunities f o r advancement are poor.

county residents is d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o the standard of l i v i n g and i t s prospects f o r growth and progress i n the future.

The education of INVENTORY The Limestone County Board of Education operates 1 2 schools i n the county school system.

County except t h e City of Athens and the Athens-Limestone Vocational Technical Center (a county school).

The service area of the county system includes all of Limestone There a r e presently t h i r t e e n (13) schools i n the Limestone County School System.

The following is a review of September 1982 enrollment.

School Grades Enrollment Tanner Primary Re i d Johnson Jr. High Mooresville-Belle Mina Owens Jr. High Piney Chapel Ardmore Clements East Limestone Elkmont Tanner West Limestone KT 3 K-6 K-9 K-6 K-9 K-9 K-12 K-12 K-12 K-12 K-12 K-12 159 167 283 161 537 430 916 946 1, 007 724 701 737 6,768 A l l teachers are professionally c e r t i f i e d and schools m e e t S t a t e accredi-t a t i o n requirement.

Graduating seniors t o t a l s 471.

Pupil-teacher r a t i o f o r grades K-6 is 1 9 : l and grades 7-12 is 16:l.

STANDARDS The following school standards have been developed by t h e Alabama S t a t e Department of Education, Division of Departmental Services.

The standards herein are standards designed t o maintain minimum f a c i l i t y development through-out the s t a t e.

MODERN TRNEDS I N BUILDINGS AND SITES For some t i m e much thought and a t t e n t i o n has been given t o the improvement of i n s t r u c t i o n i n our public schools.

Improved methods of teaching and the reorganization of the program t o meet modern needs and demands have necessitated more a t t e n t i o n being given t o adequate f a c i l i t i e s t o house a desirable program.

108

I I

1 I

I 1

1 1

I 1

I I

I 1

8 I

1 1

1

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

c Some of the reasons f o r larger school centers a r e a s follows:

A broader educational program may be offered; consequently, the children w i l l be given greater educational opportunities.

The holding power o r larger schools tends t o be greater than t h a t of smaller schools.

This should r e s u l t i n a larger percentage of school children being given the opportunity a s w e l l a s the desire t o obtain a more complete and useful education.

II B e t t e r qualified teachers a r e a t t r a c t e d t o larger, well-planned and well-equipped schools.

More adequate f a c i l i t i e s, equipment, and other teaching aids are often available.

Transportation, i f properly carried out, is less hazardous than when pupils walk on dangerous highways t o schools.

Larger school centers require larger and more permanent types of school buildings than small school centers.

A s a r u l e, buildings a t large school centers a r e more economical t o maintain than a r e several scattered small school buildings a t d i f f e r e n t centers.

The school buildings and grounds f o r larger schools contribute more, i n a l l probability, t o the general attractiveness of the community.

SCHOOL PROGRAMS In school p l a n t planning, much thought must be given not only t o the number of classrooms needed to accommodate pupils, but a l s o t o special f a c i l i t i e s neces-sary so t h a t a s a t i s f a c t o r y program can function.

Some of these special f a c i l i -

ties a r e a s follows:

auditorium, lunchroom a c t i v i t i e s space, visual aids room, l i b r a r y space, science rooms (especially science l a b o r a t o r i e s ), physical educa-tion f a c i l i t i e s (both inside and o u t s i d e ), vocational home economics, vocational agriculture, trades, and industry, rooms for music including band, conference rooms, health and sanitation f a c i l i t i e s, administration o f f i c e s, and others a s the program demands.

Act and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act makes it desirable t o take advantage of the assistance offered t o provide a program of the highest quality.

The passage by Congress of the National Defense Education SITE S I Z E

1.

Elementary School P u p i l Number:

0-100; S i t e Size:

5 acres Additional 100 pupils; additional 5 acres

2.

Junior High School Pupil N u m b e r :

1-100; S i t e Size:

10 acres Additional 100 pupils; additional 10 acres

\\

109

3.

Senior High School Pupil Number:

1-100; S i t e Size:

15 acres Additional 100 p u p i l s ; additional acre Minimum:

25 acres (includes 12-grade schools)

I RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 9 0

1.

Rehabilitate t h e e x i s t i n g physical p l a n t s of those high schools necessary t o obtain Southern Association of Colleges and Schools standards, as w e l l as t o maintain S t a t e c e r t i f i c a t i o n.

Modernize t h e physical p l a n t s of those elementary and junior high schools required t o a t t a i n Southern Association of College and Schools accreditation, and t o r e t a i n S t a t e c e r t i f i c a t i o n a s necessary.

Add acreage t o t h e following school sites i n order t o enable these s i t e s t o m e e t minimum state standards:

a. 11 acres t o Ardmore High

b.

6 acres t o Clements High

c. 11 acres t o W e s t Limestone High

d.

9.5 acres t o Mooresville-Belle Mina Junior High L.

3.

Note:

These schools have adjacent tracts of open land available a t the s i t e.

RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 9 1 - 2 0 0 0

1.

Continue land acquisition program through the year 2000, i f funds are un-available f o r successful completion of land acquisition during the period 1982-1990.

Classroom additions and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n p r o j e c t s should have f i r s t p r i o r i t y during p r i o r period.

2.

The f a c i l i t i e s a t Ardmore High, E a s t Limestone High, Elkmont High, and Tanner High a r e located i n areas expected t o experience s i g n i f i c a n t growth during t h e l a t t e r p a r t of the planning period (1991-2000).

Therefore, these high schools and t h e i r elementary and junior high school feeder areas should plan f o r f u r t h e r c a p i t a l improvements during the period 1982-2000.

A l l improvements, such a s a d d i t i o n a l classrooms, should be designed t o meet t h e minimum standards as described i n t h i s section on Education.

POLICIES

1.

Elementary Schools Each school should be r e l a t e d t o a community as c e n t r a l l y as possible within i t s service a r e a, within a half hour bus t r a v e l time.

I t should be conveniently located or both walking and transported students.

2.

Junior High Schools Each school should be r e l a t e d t o an outlying community as c e n t r a l l y as possible within i t s service area consistent with transportation routes servic-ing t h e area and be within one hour bus t r a v e l t i m e of a l l students.

Com-munity use of the school f a c i l i t i e s is a f a c t o r t o be considered i n s i t e loca-t i o n.

NUMBER OF TEACHERS Elementary Schools:

6 teachers; one teacher per grade Junior High Schools:

6 teachers; two teachers p e r grade Senior High Schools:

6 teachers; two teachers p e r grade OTHER FACTORS In the purchase of new s i t e s o r where major expansion is planned t o an e x i s t i n g school p l a n t, care must be taken t o provide f o r s a f e and h e a l t h f u l conditions.

Where w a t e r and s e w e r l i n e s a r e not a v a i l a b l e and where there i s any doubt about finding a s u i t a b l e w a t e r supply and t h e a b i l i t y t o provide f o r sewage disposal, county health a u t h o r i t i e s should be asked or advice and assistance.

I t cannot be too strongly emphasized t h a t adequate, s a f e, and h e a l t h f u l sites f o r t h e location of school p l a n t f a c i l i t i e s must be secured.

3.

Senior High Schools Each school should be located within one hour maximum bus t r a v e l t i m e of a l l students i n each d i r e c t i o n.

Community use of school f a c i l i t i e s w i l l in-fluence location.

Note:

P o l i c i e s regarding pupil/teacher r a t i o, site s i z e, and other physi-cal f a c t o r s should be based upon minimum standards developed by the S t a t e De-partment of Education.

These standards are presented i n t h i s plan.

SPECIAL EDUCATION FACILITIES F a c i l i t i e s i n t h i s category include colleges and u n i v e r s i t i e s, vocational and technical schools, and other special educational f a c i l i t i e s.

These f a c i l i -

ties are separated from other educational f a c i l i t i e s because of t h e i r unique educational c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s.

These i n s t i t u t i o n s perform s e r v i c e s ranging from teaching basics t o people who are otherwise unable t o obtain an education, t o teaching technical s k i l l s, to providing higher education f o r professions.

Funding comes from c i t y, county, s t a t e, and f e d e r a l agencies.

LIMESTONE AREA VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL SCHOOL The Limestone Area Vocational-Technical School is located on Sanderfer Road i n southwest Athens.

The f a c i l i t y is s i t u a t e d on a 30-acre s i t e, and w a s con-structed i n 1970 and has been recently expanded.

It is i n sound s t r u c t u r a l 111

c condition.

t i o n and serves a l l school systems within the county.

I t accommodates 608 students i n grades 10-12 and is s t a f f e d by vocational i n s t r u c t o r s.

There is no c e n t r a l l i b r a r y ; r a t h e r, each department contains i t s own technical l i b r a r y f o r student use.

The school is operated through t h e Limestone County Board of Educa-CALHON COMMUNITY JUNIOR' COLLEGE Calhoun Community Junior College is a two year, state-supported, co-educa-t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n located adjacent t o U.S.

Hwy. 31 i n the extreme southern p a r t of Limestone County.

The campus c o n s i s t s of an administration-classroom build-ing, Natural Sciences building, Allied Health building, l i b r a r y, physical educa-t i o n complex, Student Union Center, Rehabilitation Center, and classroom buildings f o r occupational programs on a 60-acre site. The curricula offered includes university-paralleled ( t r a n s f e r ) programs leading t o an Associate's degree, two-year career programs, and occupational programs.

The college is f u l l y accredited by t h e Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, and c r e d i t s accrued a t Calhoun are transferable t o any college o r university.

During 1972-1973, the enrollment w a s 3,800.

I t has increased t o 4,200 i n 1974-1975; c u r r e n t l y, some 5,000-6,000 students are enrolled.

The f a c i l i t y operates under a five-year master plan which c a l l s f o r pur-chase of an additional 75 acres and expansion of classroom f a c i l i t i e s a t e x i s t i n g buildings.

ATHENS S T A T E C O L L E G E Athens State College is located within walking distance of downtown Athens.

I t i s t h e o l d e s t i n s t i t u t i o n of higher learning i n Alabama, having been established i n 1822 as a school f o r g i r l s. It has been co-educational since 1931.

The campus occupies a 44-acre site.

The College jointed t h e Post-Secondary Division of the S t a t e Department of Education i n 1975.

It is A l a b a m a ' s only upper division i n s t i t u t i o n.

It serves the graduates of the junior colleges and technical schools of the area.

Its program includes major divisions of business education, natural science and mathematics, humanities, and s o c i a l science.

Students may pursue three degree programs:

(1) Bachelor of Arts,

( 2 ) Bachelor of Science including a Bachelor of Science i n Technology, and (3) Bachelor of Science i n Education.

Included i n these programs a r e prepro-fessional and pre-graduate concentrations and courses leading t o elementary and secondary teacher c e r t i f i c a t i o n.

I Enrollment during t h e 1977-1978 school year was approximately 1450 students.

Although many of the students are from the a r e a, students come from a l l over the United S t a t e s and several foreign countries.

This brings together a wide v a r i e t y of customs and c u l t u r e s t o enhance learning experiences.

1 1 2

RECOMMENDATIONS

1.

Athens S t a t e College should be maintained as an upper-division degree-granting i n s t i t u t i o n.

Adequate support should be provided t h i s f a c i l i t y whether t h i s support is p r i v a t e, state, and/or federal i n nature t o pre-serve its upper division s t a t u s.

2.

The various five-year capital programs of these Limestone County area i n s t i t u t i o n s should be implemented and updated as the need a r i s e s.

PUBLIC HEALTH FACILITIES Health care facilities and services are e s s e n t i a l elements i n a compre-hensive community program designed t o substantially improve the well-being of Limestone County residents.

Population projections f o r Limestone County i n -

d i c a t e t h a t an increasing percentage of county r e s i d e n t s w i l l be i n the 65-and-over age category.

This increasing number of e l d e r l y residents w i l l re-q u i r e additional h e a l t h f a c i l i t i e s i n the future.

ATH E N S-L I M E STO N E H OSP IT A L Nineteen physicians p r a c t i c e a t Athens-Limestone Hospital and represent t h e following medical specialties: Family Practice, Obstetrics, Pediatrics, Ophthalmology, Surgery, Internal Medicine, Radiology, and Pathology.

Addi-t i o n a l l y, specialists i n Cardiology, Thoracic Surgery, Urology, ENT, Neurologi-cal Surgery, and Orthopedics have consulting p r i v i l e g e s a t Athens-Limestone Hospital.

Athens-Limestone Hospital is a 91-bed general h o s p i t a l offering a f u l l range of diagnostic x-ray, nuclear medicine, ultrasound, and laboratory ser-vices plus 24-hour emergency physician care, ambulance service, intensive care u n i t, physical therapy, respiratory therapy, pharmacy, endoscopy, outpatient surgery, and a b i r t h i n g room.

A 3. 3 million d o l l a r expansion p r o j e c t has recently been completed which includes a new laboratory, x-ray department, business o f f i c e, and new f r o n t entrance t o the hospital.

The new addition is s u f f i c i e n t l y stressed t o add two additional f l o o r s t o m e e t future needs.

RECOMMENDATIONS Continue t o implement the current expansion program, a s previously de-scribed.

Westward expansion i n t o the floodprone area should be coordinated with the Athens City Planner i n order t o minimize any flooding p o t e n t i a l.

JACKSON MEMORIAL, HOSPITAL The Jackson Memorial Hospital is located i n the Town of Lester i n northwest Limestone County.

Lauderdale County, Alabama and G i l e s County, Tennessee.

The service area of t h i s hospital extends i n t o adjacent 11 3

c D. E. Jackson Hospital is f u l l y accredited by the J o i n t Commission on Ac-c r e d i t a t i o n of Hospitals.

The hospital operates a f u l l y equipped surgical u n i t and o f f e r s comprehensive laboratory and radiology s e r v i c e s, and the services of nine physicians.

A registered d i e t i t i a n o f f e r s dietetic counselling and both in-patient and out-patient pharmacy services are provided by a registered pharmacist.

The Cardio-Pulmonary department has r e c e n t l y been expanded by adding a treadmill, an EEG machine, electrocardiogram equipment, and an it-house blood gas machine.

The h o s p i t a l ' s Community Services department and Education department work together t o provide t h e community with education pro-grams a s a community service, and is now providing t h e community with 24-hourI 7 days-a-week physician s t a f f e d Emergency Room.

RECOMMENDATIONS Implement current plans t o expand, as services require.

The Lester Road connection t o Buck Island Road i n Salem should be improved, f o r easier access t o other areas of Limestone County and t o Lauderdale County a s w e l l.

TRI-COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT The Limestone County branch of the Health D i s t r i c t is located a t 310 West Elm S t r e e t i n Athens.

This building, constructed i n 1973, is i n sound con-d i t i o n.

The Health Center provides the services l i s t e d below normally without charge.

Personal Services:

V i t a l S t a t i s t i c s Records Present programs of i n t e r e s t t o the public o r s p e c i f i c groups Nutritional I n s t r u c t i o n Intake Nurse a v a i l a b l e on Thursdays C l i n i c a l Services:

Maternity C l i n i c held weekly Child Health C l i n i c held each Tuesday ages 0-2 Weekly c l i n i c f o r diagnosis and treatment of venereal disease Clinics f o r diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis-appointment Immunization c l i n i c held weekly Family Planning s e r v i c e s Women, I n f a n t, Children (WIC) is a program t h a t provides c e r t a i n foods t o s p e c i f i c persons who are f i n a n c i a l l y and medically e l i g i b l e.

A program of School Health Nursing is administered i n each school within Limestone County.

The Environmental Health Division conducts a program of inspection and permitting f o r a l l food handling establishments, motels, d a i r i e s, and swimming pools, s e p t i c tank i n s t a l l a t i o n s and solid waste enforcement.

114

I 1

1 1

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

I I

J I

I The A i r Pollution Control division of ADEM conducts a program of inspec-t i o n and permitting of p o t e n t i a l air pollution sources.

RECOMMENDATIONS Employ a minimum of four additional s a n i t a r i a n s during t h e planning period.

This increase i n s t a f f should enable the center t o surpass t h e American Public Health Association's standards f o r s a n i t a t i o n s t a f f.

The increased r e s i d e n t i a l development i n areas not served by sewers has d r a s t i c a l l y increased the need f o r s a n i t a r y inspections.

POLICIES

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

The increasing number of e l d e r l y individuals i n Limestone County should be considered i n any proposals f o r health development planning program-ming.

Health c l i n i c s and other out-patient medical and health services should continue t o be provided i n c e n t r a l locations where the given f a c i l i t y w i l l have access and v i s i b i l i t y t o the public.

Local health and h o s p i t a l agencies should coordinate l o c a l plans with t h e areawide health planning proposed t o be r e i n s t i t u t e d v i a t h e North Alabama Health Systems Agency.

Local plans f o r physical f a c i l i t i e s should be undertaken according t o standards u t i l i z e d by the Bureau of Health F a c i l i t i e s Construction, Alabama State Department of Health.

Small h e a l t h f a c i l i t i e s such as d o c t o r ' s o f f i c e s and p r i v a t e c l i n i c s are encouraged t o locate i n r u r a l community centers.

Special, s m a l l, public health c l i n i c s should be established i n mobile health u n i t s provided t o areas of low-income housing, especially i n out-lying areas.

ELECTRIC POWER AND NATURAL GAS U t i l i t i e s using wires--electric power, telephone, telegraph, f i r e alarm, and p o l i c e call box systems are the elements under consideration i n t h i s sec-tion.

This plan is concerned with the location of t h e s e w i r e s i n addition t o the location of the buildings required i n t h e operation of u t i l i t i e s using w i r e s.

Limestone County is within the power service area of the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Electric energy is furnished t o both urban and r u r a l areas of t h e county through public power u t i l i t i e s.

power t o the C i t y of Athens.

t o the e n t i r e county.

The Tennessee Valley Authority furnishes Athens has a franchise f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n of power Generating p l a n t s within o r near the area include t h r e e dams and two steam p l a n t s representing an i n s t a l l e d generating capacity of 3,403,000 kilo-w a t t s including the following i n s t a l l a t i o n s :

Widows Creek Steam Plant--1,175,000 115

kilowatts; Colbert Steam Plant--1,300,000 kilowatts; Wilson Dam--598,000 kilo-w a t t s ; Wheeler Dam--259,000 kilowatts and Guntersville Dam--72,900 kilowatts.

An additional source of electric power has been a c t i v a t e d a t t h e Browns Ferry Nuclear P l a n t, which produces the l a r g e s t s i n g l e capacity of a l l p l a n t s i n TVA's A l a b a m a D i s t r i c t ; 4,000,000 kilowatts.

GAS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM G a s is delivered t o consumers primarily f o r heating purposes under uniform but comparatively low pressures.

G a s l i n e s can follow topography but are usually l a i d with a s l i g h t gradient t o allow f o r the drainage of water caused by condensation.

The transmission l i n e s of t h e Alabama-Tennessee Natural G a s Company supply the county.

The transmission l i n e s run i n c l o s e proximity t o the r i v e r, r a i l -

roads, and highways, affording easy access f o r n a t u r a l gas t o many properties considered as d e s i r a b l e i n d u s t r i a l sites.

Areas served by n a t u r a l gas include Alabama Hwy. 2 0 through southeastern Limestone County and areas along U.S. 31 from Decatur north t o Athens.

PUBLIC UTILITIES POLICIES U t i l i t i e s having t h e g r e a t e s t influence upon urban growth p a t t e r n s a r e the w a t e r and sewer systems.

These systems a r e r e l a t i v e l y c o s t l y and areas i n t o which they can be economically extended are largely determined by topographic conditions and n a t u r a l b a r r i e r s.

The extension of these systems t o serve s c a t t e r e d, low density development becomes c o s t l y because a g r e a t e r length of l i n e must be i n s t a l l e d t o serve each.individua1 customer.

A t the same t i m e,

the provision of other services including transportation, schools, garbage col-l e c t i o n, e t c., becomes more c o s t l y.

It follows then t h a t a more compact devel-opment p a t t e r n f o r an urban a r e a generally leads t o g r e a t e r economy i n the pro-vision of governmental services.

Since the a v a i l a b i l i t y of w a t e r and s e w e r ser-vices can determine where and how urban growth can occur, p o l i c i e s affecting the extension of these u t i l i t i e s have a controlling influence over urban growth patterns.

Water and s e w e r extension p o l i c i e s, therefore, are the most e f f e c t i v e means available t o a community t o guide development i n accordance with planned objectives f o r f u t u r e growth.

Urban growth p a t t e r n s are shaped, t o a large extent, by u t i l i t y service p o l i c i e s.

where urban growth w i l l occur and where it w i l l not.

p o l i c i e s are coordinated with an area's objectives f o r f u t u r e growth, a more a t t r a c t i v e and e f f i c i e n t urban environment can be created.

Conversely, the lack of sound u t i l i t y service p o l i c i e s can lead t o chaotic development p a t t e r n s and higher c o s t s f o r government services.

This i s because t h e presence o r absence of u t i l i t i e s can determine When u t i l i t y service U t i l i t y services normally associated with urban growth include e l e c t r i c i t y,

gas, telephone, water, and s e w e r.

In terms of controlling urban development 116

patterns, however, electric, gas, and telephone services exert l i t t l e influence.

Urban growth can take place with o r without a gas d i s t r i b u t i o n system because a l t e r n a t i v e f u e l s and power supplies a r e available, While e l e c t r i c and tele-phone services are the major concern of public p o l i c i e s f o r these two u t i l i t i e s.

1

... I-WATER AND SEWER POLICIES

1.

Establish an urban service d i s t r i c t beyond which water and sewer exten-sions w i l l not be made except f o r i n d u s t r i a l o r other necessary purposes.

The limits of such an urban service d i s t r i c t should be mutually agreed upon by the governing bodies of the municipalities and Limestone County.

These limits could be reviewed annually and necessary adjustments made with the consent of a l l governments.

The urban service d i s t r i c t should contain only those portions of the county which are e i t h e r 1) urbanized,

2) experiencing urbanization, o r 3 ) suited f o r e a r l y urbanization.

In defining the d i s t r i c t boundaries, due consideration must be given t o the c a p i t a l programming requirements of the l o c a l governments o r d i s t r i c t s and t h e i r financial a b i l i t y t o extend services.

2.

Establish means of providing water and sewer services on an area-wide basis.

Eighty-five percent of the municipal water supply i n Limestone County is provided through t h e Athens Water System.

I t i s l o g i c a l, therefore, t h a t t h i s system continue t o be expanded t o m e e t f u t u r e needs of the county.

This could be accomplished through supplying water t o other s y s t e m through contractual agreements and by extending the Athens system i n t o unincor-porated areas.

3.

P r i o r i t i e s f o r extending water and sewer services should be i n the follow-ing order:

a.

To developed areas where there e x i s t s an immediate t h r e a t t o public health.

b.

To developing areas.

The timely and planned extension of services t o developing areas provides an opportunity t o shape urban growth patterns and achieve maximum economy and efficiency of service.

c.

To developed areas without urgent public h e a l t h o r s a f e t y problems.

Where development p a t t e r n s have already been established, water and sewer extension p o l i c i e s w i l l have a minimum e f f e c t upon future de-velopment patterns.

While water and s e w e r services should eventually be provided t o these areas t o prevent future health problem and t o encourage urbanization, p r i o r i t y or t h e i r extension t o such areas would be r e l a t i v e l y low.

d.

To areas subject t o development within f i v e t o ten years.

Extension p o l i c i e s should a n t i c i p a t e short-range requirements f o r urbar.

growth and lead such growth i n t o appropriate p a t t e r n s t h a t maximize economy and efficiency of services.

117

4.

Urban density p a t t e r n s should be permitted only i n areas served by w a t e r and s e w e r systems.

7.

Locate water and s e w e r l i n e s and f a c i l i t i e s only when they conform t o the I

County Comprehensive Plan f o r development and a r e coordinated with other r e l a t e d s e r v i c e s o r improvements.

Septic tanks and w e l l s present health problems when permitted on the smaller l o t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of urban density.

County land use and sub-division regulations should be adopted, and t h e i r provisions should require large l o t s f o r areas not served by w a t e r and s e w e r systems.

Such pro-visions would n o t only prevent health problems, but would a l s o encourage appropriate urban development patterns.

Such a c t i o n would require l o c a l l e g i s l a t i o n v i a the S t a t e Legislature.

I

8.

Major elements of the water and s e w e r systems must be planned on an area-wide b a s i s.

5.

Withhold w a t e r and s e w e r extensions i n t o areas t h a t w i l l be developed a t low, non-urban d e n s i t i e s.

This policy would prevent premature development of land not y e t r i p e f o r urban development and eliminate the high c o s t required t o provide urban services t o such areas.

6.

Withhold t h e extension of water and sewer services t o areas not suited f o r urban development.

There are areas, such as flood p l a i n s, a i r p o r t influence zones, o r iso-lated land areas within the boundaries of the Wheeler Wildlife Refuge, t h a t should not be developed t o urban d e n s i t i e s.

By withholding water services from such areas, flood damage can be reduced, pressures t o re-s t r i c t the a i r p o r t would be minimized, and proposed acquisitions of land f o r the Wildlife Refuge would be prevented by unwise urban development.

The control over extensions of water and sewer f a c i l i t i e s is the most im-p o r t a n t tool a v a i l a b l e t o l o c a l governing o f f i c i a l s t o implement a com-prehensive plan f o r areawide growth.

sions be coordinated with other p r e r e q u i s i t e s f o r urban growth, including road and s t r e e t construction, public f a c i l i t i e s, and major p r i v a t e devel-opments.

I t is e s s e n t i a l t h a t such exten-Major elements of these two systems include major mains and o u t f a l l s,

treatment p l a n t s, and w a t e r r e s e r v o i r s.

These elements must be planned on an areawide b a s i s i f long-range needs a r e t o be m e t and economies of scale achieved.

9.

Water and s e w e r extensions should be accomplished simultaneously.

Where water is extended t o unsewered a r e a s, s e p t i c tanks o r package sewer treatment p l a n t s are required.

Such f a c i l i t i e s f o r t r e a t i n g waste a r e temporary measures a t b e s t and generally lead t o pollution and health

. 118

problems.

Sound urban development requires both w a t e r and sewer services.

When they are provided i n i n i t i a l stages of development, healthy urban growth can occur.

quently arise.

When one o r both are absent, blighting conditions fre-

10.

All c o s t s and charges for construction and service should be borne by benefitted property owners o r individuals.

The c o s t of f a c i l i t i e s t h a t serve e n t i r e w a t e r and s e w e r service areas, such as reservoirs, treatment p l a n t s, major mains and major o u t f a l l s,

should be borne by a l l benefitted property owners within such service areas.

Services extended a t the request of p r i v a t e individuals o r de-velopers should be paid f o r by such individuals o r developers.

11.

Future water systems serving the unincorporated areas of Limestone County should be financed cooperatively by the prospective customers i n the area and by t h e County Commission.

I n addition, each new water system should be established under t h e control and administration of the County Commission, v i a t h e Water Authority.

Administration of the system should be the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the County Water Authority, and t h e County Engineering Department should provide necessary engineering s t u d i e s i n cooperation with consulting firms i f needed.

1 2.

A l l available w a t e r resources f o r the Limestone County areas should be u t i l i z e d when necessary and feasible.

Impending growth requires the assurance of an abundant water supply f o r r e s i d e n t i a l and economic a c t i v i t i e s.

The county government should study a l l long-range p o s s i b i l i t i e s t o &prove an areawide w a t e r system.

13.

Limestone County government should own, manage, and operate sanitary s e w e r systems i n unincorporated areas, such a s Pryor, Tanner, and French M i l l, v i a the County Water Authority.

I f municipalities annex such t e r r i t o r y a f t e r a sanitary sewer system is provided, an agreement f o r t r a n s f e r of control of t h e system t o the municipality should be entered i n t o by Limestone County and the given municipality.

Such an agreement should a l s o be made where an area becomes incorporated as a new municipality upon completion of a s e w e r system.

14.

In areas where a municipality extends services t o unincorporated areas, an agreement should be entered i n t o defining the f i n a n c i a l and planning responsibility of the county and the municipality.

This type of an agreement should assist i n defining t h e county r o l e i n financing c o l l e c t i o n l i n e s i n t o presently unincorporated areas.

119

15.

The use of s e p t i c tanks i n a l l but l o w density r e s i d e n t i a l areas should be discouraged.

Septic tanks i n built-up areas are l i k e l y t o cause pollution of s o i l and ground water supplies.

Because they a r e a p o t e n t i a l health danger, they should only be used i n non-urban areas.

16.

Policy f o r Extension of Water Service SERVICE ECONOMIC POPULATION DENSITY EQUIVALENT LOT SIZE JUSTIFICATION Over 2,500 persons/

L e s s than 1 acre J u s t i f i e d 1,000-2,500 persons/

1 to 2 acres Probably J u s t i f i e d 500-1,000 persons/

2 t o 4 acres Not Normally J u s t i f i e d Less than 500 persons/

Over 4 acres Rarely J u s t i f i e d square m i l e square m i l e square m i l e square m i l e

17. Policy f o r Extension of Sewer Service SERVICE ECONOMIC POPULATION DENSITY EQUIVALENT LOT SIZE JUSTIFICATION L e s s than 3 acre J u s t i f i e d Over 5,000 persons/

2,500-5,000 persons/

4 t o 1 acre Normally J u s t i f i e d 1,000-2,500 persons/

L e s s than 1,000 Over 2 acres Rarely J u s t i f i e d square m i l e square m i l e square m i l e persons/square m i l e 1 t o 2 acres Not Normally J u s t i f i e d UTILITY WIRE DISTRIBUTION POLICIES E l e c t r i c power and telephone d i s t r i b u t i o n i n the United States have devel-oped primarily as overhead systems.

are found primarily i n c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t s and i n a few exclusive resi-d e n t i a l sections.

Those few underground systems t h a t do e x i s t The overhead system of d i s t r i b u t i o n w a s o r i g i n a l l y adopted 120

I I

1 1

I I

I 1

1 1

8 1

I 8

I I

1 I

I because of its minimum construction c o s t s, f l e x i b i l i t y and simplicity of con-s t r u c t i o n.

I n the e a r l y s t a g e s of developing the e l e c t r i c a l d i s t r i b u t i o n i n t h e United S t a t e s, only a few l i n e s w e r e needed t o serve r e s i d e n t i a l areas.

I n later decades, the expanding use of appliances and electric heating g r e a t l y increased capacity requirements.

I n addition, many other l i n e s have been added t o the poles, including those f z r street l i g h t i n g, emergency alarm c i r c u i t s, t e l e -

phones, and t e l e v i s i o n cables.

The growing ugliness of t h e c l u t t e r e d overhead system has brought about attempts t o improve i t s looks.

For the most p a r t,

however, l i t t l e has been done t o n u l l i f y the objectionable a e s t h e t i c f e a t u r e s of overhead wiring.

Because of t h e objectional features of the overhead system, there has been a.growing i n t e r e s t i n placing d i s t r i b u t i o n systems or electric and telephone service underground.

Recent innovations and improved techniques f o r burying these d i s t r i b u t i o n systems have gone f a r t o reduce c o s t s and eliminate mzny of objections voiced by u t i l i t y coppanies and developers.

These advances indicate t h a t the development of underground systems w i l l soon nature t o the p o i n t of general acceptance--from an economical a s w e l l as technical standpoint.

I n the meantime, public p o l i c i e s concerning t h e location and aspearance of overhead l i n e s should be strengthened.

P o l i c i e s t b z t should be considered f o r Limestone County and Athens include the following:

1.

2.

3.

4.

Encourage u t i l i t y companies and developers t o bury S i s t r i b u t i o n s y s t e m where economically f e a s i b l e o r where a e s t h e t i c consideration require such b u r i a l.

a.

T r e e trimming.

The underground system e l b i n a r e s the need f o r tree trimming which, f o r overhead systems, might rm a s high 2s $4 t o $7 per year per pole.

b.

Ice and storage drainage.

Wind and i c e s t o m s can cause widespread damage t o overhead systems while having no e f f e c t on buried systens.

c.

Reduced exposure t o accidents.

Buried systems eliminate o r d r a s t i -

c a l l y reduce accidents caused by:

construction equipment making contact with wires; automobiles breaking poles; f a l l i n g t r e e s break-ing l i n e s ; pole top f i r e s ; animals shorting o u t l i n e s ; w i r e fatique; unauthorized persons climbing poles; and mzny others.

Regulate t h e location of overhead d i s t r i b u t i o n l i x e s i n new land suMi-vision.

A l l bond i s s u e s regarding s t r e e t lighting should o f f e r only o r n m e n t a l standards with underground wiring.

Where f e a s i b l e, new apartment areas should be se-Tved by underground wiring.

1 2 1

5.

The City of Athens and other service d i s t r i c t s should be encouraged t o replace unslightly overhead f a c i l i t i e s with more a t t r a c t i v e, modern standard, poles, transformers, etc.

P o l i c i e s f o r Water, Sewer, G a s, and Electric U t i l i t i e s I n s t a l l e d J o i n t l y

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

I n newly developing areas, developers and/or public and private u t i l i t y agencies o r companies should be encouraged t o provide as complete a u t i l i t y system as possible commensurate with t h e type of development.

Trunk u t i l i t y l i n e s should be i n s t a l l e d i n advance o r a t the t i m e of development i n accordance with a general plan f o r the area.

service u t i l i t y l i n e s should be i n s t a l l e d as needed.

Local or The solution t o specialized u t i l i t y problems created by a p a r t i c u l a r type of use (such as abnormal or peak load power and water requirements o r unusual sewage disposal problems of c e r t a i n types of i n d u s t r i e s )

should be worked o u t by t h e community and the p a r t i e s responsible.

Where possible, underground u t i l i t i e s should be grouped and located where accessible.

A l l u t i l i t y buildings and s t r u c t u r e s such a s telephone exchange build-ings, transformer s t a t i o n s, sewage disposal p l a n t s, pumping s t a t i o n s,

water towers, and r e s e r v o i r s should be located adjoining non-residential uses wherever possible.

Functions r e l a t e d t o u t i l i t y operations, which a r e not d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o the delivery of a service t o a r e s i d e n t i a l area (such as o f f i c e man-agement, c o l l e c t i o n of service charges, storage of materials o r vehicles, maintenance and r e p a i r ), should be located i n commercial or i n d u s t r i a l areas.

Public o r p r i v a t e u t i l i t y buildings transformer s t a t i o n s, sewage disposal p l a n t s, pumping s t a t i o n s, water towers, r e s e r v o i r s, e t c., should be designed, landscaped and maintained i n such a manner so as to minimize the adverse e f f e c t s on adjoining uses.

d e n t i a l areas.

This is of p a r t i c u l a r importance i n resi-RECREATION Recreation has long been recognized as an e s s e n t i a l element i n t h e l i f e The demand or r e c r e a t i o n a l p a t t e r n of a l l normal individuals and families.

spaces and f a c i l i t i e s i s increasing r a t h e r dramatically as a r e s u l t of more l e i s u r e t i m e being available (shorter work week, longer vacations, b e t t e r mobility) and the increase i n disposable income per household.

The Recreation Plan f o r Limestone County attempts t o coordinate the public, semi-public and p r i v a t e s e c t o r s which provide f o r t h e l e i s u r e t i m e needs of 1 2 2 I

I I

I I

I D

1 I

i i

1 t

I I

I I

8 i

i

1 1

1 8

8 I

I I

I I

I 8

I 8

1 I

I

'I 8

the people i n t h e county.

The county of Limestone should provide f o r the d a i l y recreation needs required by its residents, especially those residents i n unin-corporated areas.

The location and q u a l i t y of Limestone County's recreation and open space system has a s i g n i f i c a n t influence on t h e o v e r a l l mental and physical w e l l -

being of a l l c i t i z e n s.

exercise, mental refreshment, i d e n t i t y, orientation and experimentation.

Open parks and recreation spaces are important public f a c i l i t i e s which serve t o im-prove and s t a b i l i z e communities, as w e l l as maintain property values.

I n addi-t i o n, most large and many small i n d u s t r i a l firms consider t h e provision of recreation f a c i l i t i e s an important p r i o r i t y i t e m i n any community's roster of c i v i c assets.

Parks and open seaces m e e t human needs f o r outdoor I-INVENTORY Although Limestone County is endowed with a large amount of open space acreage, t h i s open space is not developed for a c t i v e recreational use.

The county is severely d e f i c i e n t i n county and regional park acreage.

Table V-5 depicts the e x i s t i n g park acreage used f o r recreation within Limestone County.

These f i g u r e s include existing park acreage i n a l l munici-p a l i t i e s a s w e l l.

A t present, t h e City of Athens and t h e Towns of Elkmont' and Ardmore have l o c a l park f a c i l i t i e s.

Although t h e Comprehensive Plan w i l l concentrate on l o c a l needs and plans f o r county, regional, and r u r a l community parks, parks located i n Athens w i l l be considered i n the analysis of countywide park needs since many residents of unincorporated Limestone County u t i l i z e Athens' f a c i l i t i e s.

TABLE V-5 E X I S T I N G RECREATION AREAS:

LIMESTONE COUNTY Administering Recreation Category A c r e s Agency Location Lucy Branch B o a t Elk River Lodge Launch Lee High Fishing Elkmont Park Neighborhood Parks Community Park Ardmore Park Conservation Area Wheeler Wildlife Refuge/

TVA Reservation Camp 45 45 45 13 17 18 11 13,960 Limestone County State Dept of Conservation State D e p t. of Conservation Town of Elkmont City of Athens City of Athens Town of Ardmore U.S.

D e p t. of Interior/TVA Tennessee River Elk River E l k River E l h o n t Athens Athens Ardmor e Tennessee River SOURCE: Regional Open Space Plan, TARCOG, Huntsville, AL, April, 1973, as updated 1982.

123

The standards upon which t h e Recreation Plan f o r Limestone County is based are similar t o those adopted i n the TARCOG Regional Parks and Open Space Plan.

Until more s e n s i t i v e measures of recreation space demand are developed (parti-cipation rates f o r s p e c i f i c r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s by population type), t h e acres per thousand population standard can s u b s t i t u t e as a guide to be fol-lowed.

In t o t a l, t h e r e should be a minimum of t e n (10) acres of l o c a l park land f o r every 1,000 residents.

sub-types as shown i n Table This r a t i o is, i n t u r n, divided among t h e park TABLE V-6 ACREAGE STANDARDS FOR OPEN SPACE LANDS AND FACILITIES Type of Faci 1 i t y Open Space A c r e s P e r Category 1,000 Persons Neighborhood Park Community Park City-Wide Park Rural Community Park County Park Public Recreation Public Recreation Public Recreation and Scenic Areas Public Recreation Public Recreation, Scenic Areas, Historic Sites 2

3 5

10 1 0 Regionwide Standard f o r Local Parks Regional Park Public Recreation, 20 20*

Scenic Areas, Historic Sites Conservation Areas Regionwide Standard f o r Regional and L a c a l Parks 40

• The f i g u r e of 2 0 acres includes county parks, and/or rural cmmunity parks, or urban-level parks (neighborhood, community, and city-wide s a r k s ), depend-ing upon the s i z e of the municipality.

SOURCE:

A l a b a m a ' s Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, 1980; A l a b a m a D e p t. of Conservation and Natural Resources, b!ontqomey, AL; and TARCOG s t a f f, 1973, updated 1982.

P A R K C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S Rural Community Park--The Rural Community Park is intended t o serve the needs of t h e small community and is u t i l i z e d as t h e basic proposal i n L l i s 124

plan f o r municipalities of 2,500 o r l e s s.

Basically, t h i s park, if properly developed and located, would serve the recreation needs of the residents of the area.

A minimum s i z e of f i v e acres is recommended with the primary em-phasis on active recreation.

for densely-settled, unincorporated, r u r a l communities i n p a r t s of Limestone County which a r e remote from other recreation f a c i l i t i e s.

In addition, t h i s type of park can be developed County Park--This paricular park would serve a large p a r t of the county.

The range of population served by such a f a c i l i t y would be from 10,000 t o 40,000 people, and the minimum acreage for such a park is 100 acres.

Acreage may f l u c t u a t e from 100 acres to 400 acres.

I t is recommended by t h i s plan t h a t 10 acres per thousand of population be developed f o r county recreation a c t i v i t i e s.

Included i n t h i s r o s t e r of a c t i v i t i e s could be f a c i l i t i e s or day camps, golf courses, swimming, a lake for boating, both winter and summer sports, i n t e r i o r roads, and o f f - s t r e e t parking.

This type of park should be developed by county and s t a t e governments with assistance from federal outdoor recreation programs where available.

Surplus federal land could be used for such f a c i l i t i e s, and private donations by large landowners could be extremely helpful.

Regional Park--This type of park f a c i l i t y is intended t o serve the open space needs of several counties.

Such a f a c i l i t y should serve a minimum of 40,000 people.

A minimum of 250 acres should be developed t o the extent t h a t 20 acres per thousand population be developed i n Limestone County.

This park may include a l l previously mentioned f a c i l i t i e s f o r both active and passive recreation a s w e l l as extensive open space areas, particularly unique areas such as caves and waterfalls.

A combination of counties, the state, o r federal government should have the responsibility f o r developing parks a t the regional level. State and federal assistance is necessary f o r the development of t h i s level of park since the s i z e of the f a c i l i t y clearly outstrips local resources.

A s with the county park, surplus federal land is especially helpful i n s e t t i n g aside land f o r such a f a c i l i t y a s a r e private donations.

The remaining three types of parks--neighborhood, community and citywide--

would be developed by the respective municipalities i n the county.

Athens i s the only c i t y i n Limestone County t h a t w i l l be of the population s i z e necessary t o support the development of neighborhood, community, and citywide parks.

The Towns of Lester, and Mooresville would develop one Rural Community Park each i n t h e i r respective municipalities a s Elkmont and Ardmore already have one each of these parks.

Table V-7 depicts the acreage i n parks needed by the year 2000 i n Lime-stone County.

County government w i l l be t o t a l l y o r p a r t i a l l y responsible f o r a s s i s t i n g i n the development of county and regional parks.

In addition, r e s i -

dents of c e r t a i n unincorporated r u r a l communities may request assistance of the County Commission i n developing r u r a l community parks.

This Table considers r u r a l community park needs for municipalities only since it would be extremely 125

c d i f f i c u l t t o assess unincorporated areas t o attempt t o advocate its need t o the County Commission, usually through a community development club.

TABLE V-7 PROJECTED GROSS ACRE NEEDS:

LIMESTONE COUNTY Total Added N e t Acreage Existing t o be added Acreage Limestone County Parks Acreage 1982 1982 1990 2000 1974-2000 Neighborhood Parks 3

17 6

8 8

19 4 1 Community Parks 1

18 24 1 2 1 2 18 66 Citywide Parks 0

0 70 20 20 30 140 Rural Community Parks 2

24 8

6 7

0 23 County Parks 3

115 305 60 80 115 560 Regional Parks 0

0 840 120 160 220 1,340 TOTAL 9

174 1, 2 5 3 226 281 382 2,070 SOUkCE : TARCOG R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S ( 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 9 0 1

1.

Develop three 125-acre county parks; two of these parks should be located i n the watersheds of Piney and Limestone Creeks, and a t h i r d should be located i n the upper portion of Swan Creek near Elkmont.

This latter park could assist i n serving the county park needs of the proposed Elhnont Village, a new community recommended by t h e TVA and Elk f i v e r Development Association.

2.

Limestone County, i n cooperation with the TVA, should develop approximately 1,500 acres of regional park along the Elk River upstream from the Lee H i Fishing Camp.

This park can be located between t h i s camp and t h e Gallus Island v i c i n i t y of the Elk R i v e r.

Coordination between Limestone County and ERDA and TVA w i l l be needed regarding regional park locations i n t h i s v i c i n i t y since the proposed new communities w i l l a l s o be developed e a s t of t h i s area.

Proper coordination between agencies could assure the residents of the new communities an additional source of p a k land.

Lucy Branch Park should be renovated and expanded, a s these f a c i l i t i e s, serv-ing a low-income area are inadequate.

3.

R u r a l Community Parks should be considered f o r t h e unincorporated com-munities of Tanner, Capshaw, French M i l l, and Blackburn during t h i s period.

Also, additional park acreage w i l l be needed i n the v i c i n i t y of Pryor once r e s i d e n t i a l development occurs i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e new General Motors P l a n t, being expanded.

The incorporated towns of Mooresville and Lester should each develop a r u r a l community park f o r l o c a l park needs.

Ardmore and Elkmont already have such parks, althoughthey should be expanded.

1 2 6

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S ( 1 9 9 1 - 2 0 0 0

1.

Two 100-acre county parks should be developed; one in the southwestern part of the county near Browns Ferry Road, and one in the far north-western part of the county, southwest of Lester. The beautiful rolling countryside in this vicinity offers innumerable opportunities or recreation development in this area.

2.

Approximately 400 acres should be added to the Elk River Regional Park initiated during the 1981-1990 period. Continued coordination should be maintained between the Department of Interior, TVA, and ERDA in the loca-tion selection of additional park acquisitions.

,r3, Additional rural community park needs should be met for the unincorporated

,communities of Thatch, Salem, Owens School, Belle Mina, Fairview, and Greenbrier during this segment of the planning period. The municipalities under 2,500 population should be adequately served by the rural cornunity parks developed during the 1983-1990 period.

POLICIES The following policies are designed to assist the County Commission and other interested agencies and groups in the decision-making process when sites or new parks and recreation areas are considered.

toward rural cornunity parks, county parks, and regional parks.

The policies are oriented Rural Community Parks

1.

Sites to be used for rural community parks should be reasonably flat to permit their development for active recreation.

2.

Sites for rural community parks should be accessible to the user group they are intended to serve.

to serve one town or community.

These parks should be located and designed

3.

The multipurpose use of school grounds to meet local active park needs should be encouraged.

4.

The County Commission should seek assistance fram the County Board of Education and local landowners willing to lease or donate land for park sites before the county attempts to purchase land for a rural community park in any area. Community interest is, therefore, a key factor in determining what community will develop a rural community park.

County Parks

1.

Features of sites for county parks should be used to their best ad-vantage in park development. Examples of such features are streams, rock outcrops, topography, and the relationship of the park to adjoining de-velopment.

2.

Sites for county parks should be acquired in advance of need, 1 2 7

3.

Direct purchase should be made of s i t e s f o r proposed county parks.

Owner-ship i n f e e simple w i l l guarantee t h a t the County Commission has ccmplete control of the s i t e and f a c i l i t i e s.

Regional Parks

1.

Although the location of regional p G k s and reservations is dependent on available areas of scenic and inspirational q u a l i t y, such areas should be within convenient t r a v e l time from a l l major portions of the county i n order t o provide necessary r e l i e f from day-to-day living.

2.

Preserves, which a r e areas of h i s t o r i c a l, ecological, archaelogical, o r other s c i e n t i f i c value o r areas of outstanding scenic o r wilderness character, must necessarily be acquired where they occur with no rela-tionship t o population or development.

3.

Any reduction i n amount of leased s t a t e f o r e s t o r park lands or inter-mingling p r i v a t e f o r e s t should be discouraged, and any steps taken t o preserve natural c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of natural park areas should be s q -

ported.

4.

Any sponsoring agency developing regional parks i n Limestone County should coordinate its e f f o r t s with the following agencies:

a.

County Commission

b.

S t a t e Department of Conservation

c.

S t a t e Forestry Commission

d.

Tennessee V a l l e y Authority

e.

U. S. Department of I n t e r i o r (National Park Service) f. Elk River Development Association 1 2 8

WATER SERVICE The a v a i l a b i l i t y of water is c r u c i a l t o any type of development.

Wzter system development is a key element of community planning i n f o u r basic ways: supply, q u a l i t y, q u a n t i t y and d i s t r i b u t i o n.

This p o r t i o n of t h e p l a n is concerned p r i m a r i l y with q u a n t i t y and d i s t r i b u t i o n.

EXISTING SERVICE - The cities of Athens, Ardmore, Mooresville, Elkmont, and Lester and t h e "Areas" of Be1I.e Mina and Greenbriar are served by i n d i v i d u a l water systems.

Several small unincorporated communities i n t h e South C e n t r a l p o r t i o n of t h e County are served by t h e South Limestone Water System which r e c e i v e s water from Athens and Decatur.

The E a s t Limestone Water System s e r v e s t h e E a s t Central por-t i o n of t h e County.

The F o r t Hampton Water System s e r v e s t h e Western and South-western p o r t i o n o f ' t h e County, and t h e North Limestone Water System p r i m a r i l y s e r v e s t h e Northeastern p o r t i o n of t h e County.

While t h e s e e l e v e n total systems cover a l a r g e p o r t i o n o f t h e County, coverage within each of t h e s e areas is n o t complete, and t h e r e are l a r g e p o r t i o n s of t h e l o c a l governments forming unincorporated County t o t a l l y unserved.

TARCOG has adopted a Regional Water Plan which p r o v i d e s f o r t h e planned water service to a l l f e a s i b l e areas of t h e TARCOG r e g i o n, i n c l u d i n g Limestone County.

All systems proposed i n t h i s Limestone County Comprehensive Plan conform t o t h e Regional Water Plan.

The Limestone County Commission, along with t h e Limestone County Water Authori-t y, has h i s t o r i c a l l y performed t h e r o l e o f l o c a l peoject sponsor or r u r a l and community water systems i n Limestone County.

Therefore, the County Government re-cognizes t h e role needed t o be performed by t h e County Commission i n promoting sound and o r d e r l y development i n t h e unincorporated areas of t h e County.

INVENTORY OF LIMESTONE COUNTY COMMUNITY AND RURAL SYSTEMS I

1.

Ardmore a

1 I

I t

2.

Mooresville-Belle Mina Water Authority 3.

Elkmont

4.

Lester 5.

E a s t Limestone Water System (County-owned)

6.

South Limestone Water System (County-owned)

7.

F o r t Hampton Water System (County-Owned)

8.

North Limestone Water System (County-Owned)

1.

Ardmore:

The Ardmore water s y s t e m s u p p l i e s approximately 2, 0 0 0 res-i d e n t s (1980) i n A l a b a m a and Tennessee with an average of about 105,000 g a l l o n s per day of potable water from two w e l l s located i n Ardmore, Tennessee.

An addi-t i o n a l 5,000 g a l l o n s p e r day is supplied t o local i n d u s t r y f o r an average total 8

I' 129

c demand on the system of 110,000 gallons p e r day.

system is 160,000 gallons per day o r 120 gallons p e r minute.

the w a t e r is stored i n two elevated tanks of 75,000 - and 150,000 - gallons.

The system does not extend beyond the Ardmore Town l i m i t s i n Alabama, but does extend about two m i l e s northwest of the City i n Tennessee.

The present capacity of t h e After chlorination,

2.

Mooresville - B e l l e Mina:

The Mooresville-Belle Mina Water Authority supplies approximately 7000 r e s i d e n t s of South-East Limeztone County with an esti-mated 100,000 gallons p e r minute from t h e Horton Spring.

cludes t h e three communities of B e l l e Mina, Greenbriar and Mooresville which have a t o t a l population of 2,500.

tween Greenbriar and Belle!Mina furnishes storage f o r the system.

The system i s capable of pumping and chlorinating 144,000 gallons p e r day from the 3,800,000 gallons per day spring.

The d i s t r i b u t i o n system, c o n s i s t i n g of 6-inch diameter and smaller pipes w a s completed i n 1966, and an extention is c u r r e n t l y being made north of Mooresville.

The service area in-A 100,000-gallon elevated tank located midway be-

3.

Elkmont:

The Elkmont Water system services approximately 200 customers i n and around Elkmont, pumping on the average of 47,000 gallons per day from t h e G i l b e r t Spring.

Elkmont which is p a r t of t h e Water System.

tank i n the middle of town t h a t holds a reserve f o r a p r i v a t e bonded cotton w a r e -

house f a c i l i t y only and is not a p a r t of t h e p u b l i c water system.

system c o n s i s t s of 6-inch dimater l i n e s, with a l a r g e majority of t o t a l length being smaller diameter l i n e s.

t i o n of new l a r g e diameter pipe l i n e s throughout town.

Additional storage w i l l be added i n t h e i n d u s t r i a l park area, and mechnical and electrical improvements a t the source w i l l be included.

The old system w a s completed i n 1964.

Treatment i s limited t o chlorination of t h e water from the 216,000 gallon p e r day spring.

Storage c o n s i s t s of a 60,000-gallons elevated storage tank i n There is a 50,000-gallon elevated The e x i s t i n g A p r o j e c t is c u r r e n t l y underway f o r the i n s t a l l a -

4.

L e s t e r : Water d i s t r i b u t i o n system serves about 30 customers with an average of about 10,000 gallons p e r day of potable w a t e r from two deep w e l l s which have a t o t a l capacity of 100,000 gallons p e r day.

system, completed i n 1970, c o n s i s t s of pipes i n s i z e s of 6 inches and smaller.

Treatment is limited t o chlorination, and storage is provided by a 50,000-gallon elevated tank.

The present d i s t r i b u t i o n 5.

E a s t Limestone Water System:

The E a s t Limestone Water System w a s com-p l e t e d i n t h e e a r l y 1970's and is attached t o t h e Eastern perimeter of the Athens Water system.

the p o i n t of t i e - i n near t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of Nick Davis Road and the City L i m i t s,

t h e E a s t Limestone System c o n s i s t s of a booster s t a t i o n capable of producing 150 gallons p e r minute o r 216,000 gallons p e r day, depending upon the City of Athens a b i l i t y t o supply w a t e r.

The d i s t r i b u t i o n system serves t h e E a s t Central portion of the County and supplies w a t e r t o r e s i d e n t i a l customers, and also serves E a s t Limestone High School.

The E a s t Limestone Water System s t o r e s i t s water i n 2 c e n t r a l l y located elevated tanks of 250,000 - gallons capacity.

A t the time of writing t h i s plan, a l l of t h e water users are r e s i d e n t i a l or s m a l l commercial subscribers.

In 1984, however, t h i s system w i l l supply water t o a new prison f a c i l i t y presently under construction by t h e S t a t e of Alabama Department of Correc-t i o n s,

It depends on Athens d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r i t s source of water.

A t (approximately 1,200 inmates and s t a f f ).

130 1

1 8

1 I

I I

8 I

I 8

I I

1 1

I 8

I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

I I

I

6.

South Limestone Water System:

Decatur has a 16-inch water l i n e ex-tending across Wheeler Reservior i n t o Limestone County t o furnish the southern p a r t of the South Limestone Water System with potable w a t e r.

an agreement with t h e County Water Authority t o furnish up t o 4,000,000 gallons per day, primarily f o r i n d u s t r i a l development.

of potable water f o r the Decatur-Athens Pryor Field as w e l l as Tanner Primary and High School.

The City of Decatur has This agreement provides a supply An estimated 50,000 t o 75,000 gallons per day o f potable water is now being

,used.with the major user being the John C. Calhoun S t a t e Junior College, which has a student enrollment of approximately 4,200 and a s t a f f and faculty numbering 80.

The General Motors Saginaw Steering G e a r Division Plant i s the second l a r g e s t user.

.The.area has approximately 100 permanent residents.

N o storage capacity is located i n the area.

7.

Fort Hampton Water System:

The point of t i e - i n t o the City of Athens Water system i s near the intersection of Highway 99 and Elm S t r e e t, and is a master meter connection only, with no pumping required.

The Fort Hampton Water System is a d i s t r i b u t i o n system which r e l i e s e n t i r e l y on t h e City of Athens for supply and storage from the Elm S t r e e t tank.

In this extensive system (which serves the West Central and South West portion of the County) 1,054 subscribers a r e served.

The d i s t r i b u t i o n system consists primarily of 6" d i s t r i b u t i o n main with a minimum amount of smaller diameter pipe.

This system is p a r t of the county water system.

8.

North Limestone Water System:

The North Limestone Water System, which covers and serves the North E a s t quadrant of Limestone County, connects t o t h e Northern perimeter of the City of Athens Water System and depends on t h i s system f o r i t s supply.

A t the intersection of Highway 127 and Sewell Road, which is the point of t i e - i n t o t h e City of Athens system, a pumping f a c i l i t y has been i n s t a l l e d which i s capable of pumping 400 gallons per minute or 5,760,000 gallons per day, depending upon the a b i l i t y of the City of Athens t o supply water t o the point of tie-in.

The system is supplied w a t e r through a 10-inch diameter transmission main from the booster s t a t i o n a t Highway 1 2 7 t o a 500,000-gallon storage tank northeast of Elkmont near the Tennessee State Line.

This c e n t r a l transmission main and storage tank provide the flows and pressure or the extensive distribution system, serving 1,350 customers, including 1,328 r e s i d e n t i a l customers.

Johnson Jr. High School i s among the l a r g e s t f a c i l i t i e s served.

N o large i n d u s t r i a l type consumers are served by t h i s system, which i s p a r t of t h e county system.

There is a con-nection to the Ardmore system, which can provide the Ardmore system with w a t e r i n emergencies as w e l l a s f o r the Town of Elkmont.

STANDARDS - The following standards f o r county--wide service have been de-veloped i n order t o promote sound u t i l i t y development i n urbanizing areas.

These standards should promote the provision of potable w a t e r t o customers and e s t a b l i s h adequate minimum standards f o r r u r a l f i r e protection.

1.

Maintain 2 minimum pipe s i z e of 6 inches where economically feasible.

2.

Maintain f i r e hydrants spaced a t a maximum distance of 1,000 f e e t 3.

Maintain no dead-end l i n e s i f possible.

4.

Maintain a minimum residual pressure of 40 PSI a t periods of peak between hydrants where economically feasible.

flow a t a l l l i n e s.

131

5.

Maintain d i r e c t County Commission administration and Water Authority administration of a l l l i n e s i n a l l unincorporated a r e a s.

WCO~~MENDATIONS

- The recommendations for County water service f o r t h e period 1984 - 2000 w i l l be made on a system by s y s t e m b a s i s.

P r i o r i t i z a t i o n of p r o j e c t s among.,systems is based on several f a c t o r s, including b u t not limited t o : present demand, unforeseen future demands, and r e l i a b i l i t y of t h e City zf Rthens-sources.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Ardmore - These recommendations a r e f o r improvements t o an e x i s t i n g system.)

a.

Present supply capacity of 160,000 gallons p e r day should be expanded t o 210,000 gallons per day.

b.

Connection should be made t o the Lincoln County U t i l i t y D i s t r i c t f o r reserve water supplies (the system is already connected t o the North Limestone System.)

i Mooresville-Belle Mind Water and F i r e Protection Authority (These recommendations a r e f o r improvements t o the e x i s t i n g system.)

a -

T i e a metered connection t o the South Limestone Water System or a r e l i a b l e source.

b.

Add 100,000 gallons storage tank a t a s t r a t e g i c point of the system.

c.

Extend l i n e s t o unserved customers within the Authority's j u r i s d i c t i o n a l area.

Elkmont - (A new construction program i s imminent and when implemented should s a t i s f y the requirements during the period 1984 - 2000)

Lester/Salem - These recommendations are f o r improvements t o an e x i s t -

ing system:)

a.

Construct a 100,000-gallon storage tank between Lester and Salem.

b.

Provide connection between Lester and Minor H i l l, Tennessee, t o provide a continued potable water supply f o r t h e Lester System.

E a s t Limestone Water System - (The recommendations a r e f o r improve-ment t o a n e x i s t i n g system.)

a.

Add d i s t r i b u t i o n l i n e s t o serve more subscribers i n the areas not served by the East Limestone System.

b.

Provide a connection from t h e South Limestone System t o the E a s t Limestone System from old U. S. Highway 31 south through Peets Corner t o the E a s t Limestone System along U.S.

Highway 72 E a s t.

1 3 2

133

c.

Provide additional connections between the East Limestone and North Limestone Water Systems north of Nick Davis Road.

6.

South Limestone Water System -(These recommendations are for improve-ments to an existing system.)

a.

Construct connection between this system and the Athens system near Tanner.

b.

Construction connection between the South Limestone system and Mooresville Bell Mina system along Alabama 20.

c.

Construct a 400,000-gallon storage tank near Tanner.

7.

Fort Hampton Water System And Limestone Water System - (The following recommendation is made relative to these two large existing systems.)

a.

Provide additional sources. This can be accomplished by locating and providing ground water sources or by constructing alternate facilities near the City of Athens treatment plant which could pump and store water, making it available for use in the North Limestone and Fort Hampton Systems.

b.

Improve flows and pressures and reliability by accomplishing the above items.

c.

Fill in distribution system in areas heretofore eliminated be-cause of lack of feasibility. These are isolated and unserved pockets of population surrounded by existing systems.

8.

West Limestone Water System - (These recommendations are for a new system, added to the Limestone County System. 1

a.

Construct a connection between this system (proposed) and the current system on S.R.

99 (Buck Island Bridge), to the 24" diameter City of Athens transmission line.

b.

Construct 101,000 linear feet of PVC pipe 6" or longer in diameter, and 70,000 linear feet of 3" diameter PVC pipe.

c.

Construct a 500,000 storage tank.

L SEWER SERVICE The disposal of sewage i s one of the major problems confronting local govern-mental units.

Within urban areas, individual disposal methods become unsatis-factory and more unified systems must be developed.

work of drains and sewers used t o c o l l e c t the l i q u i d wastes of an area f o r sub-sequent treatment, a t a wastewater treatment f a c i l i t y.

A sewerage system is a neT-Although m o s t of the unincorporated area of Limestone County w i l l not ex-perience a degree of urban development warranting s e w e r service, t h i s plan w i l l recommend sewer service i n selected areas of the county where such service is proposed t o be feasible.

I n order f o r l o c a l authorities t o u t i l i z e federal funds f o r sewer system development, the proposed systems must conform t o the regional sewer plan de-veloped for t h a t area.

fore reviewed f o r conformance t o the TARCOG Regional Sewer Plan.

The proposals developed by the Limestone County Comprehensive Plan were found t o be i n con-formance with t h i s regional plan.

Local proposals for s e w e r system development were there-INVENTORY OF' EXISTING SYSTEMS The only public waste water disposal systems i n Limestone County serve the cities of Athens and Ardmore, and the County-owned system serving the General Motors Plant-Saginaw Steering Gear Division - J. C. Calhoun Community College-Pryor Field Subarea.

Three Institutions-- the E a s t Limestone and Tanner Schools, and the Jackson Hospital a t Lester a r e served by small prefabricated plants.

of these small p l a n t s, they cannot expand to serve surrounding development. There-fore they are not considered t o be p a r t of the l a r g e r system proposed i n t h i s Plan.

Due to the nature ATHENS Athens' s e w e r system is the l a r g e s t f a c i l i t y of t h i s type i n Limestone County.

The present treatment plant can process 4,500,000 gallons per day.

Under current proposals, areas surrounding the urbanized central area of Athens. w i l l be provided with sewer before 1990.

Since community f a c i l i t y studies of Athens have explored the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s, needs, and plans of t h i s system i n greater d e t a i l, these studies should be consulted f o r more d e t a i l on t h i s system, i n the office of the Athens C i t y planner.

ARDMORE The Ardmore s e w e r system, completed i n 1969, now serves most of the two towns' residents.

of 2,200 population equivalents, the extended aeration treatment p l a n t should remove 90 percent of the BOD (Biological Oxygen Demand).

average f l o w t o the treatment plant is 140,000 gal/day, including about 4,000 A t the design flow of 220,000 gal/day and the design loading The present estimated 134

gal/day from local industry.

wastes, the t o t a l loading is estimated a t 2,000 population equivalents.

After treatment, the waste water is discharged into Piney Creek near mile 39.0.

Pro-blems i n the system include an excessive amount of i n f i l t r a t i o n.

The town has recently prepared an engineering study t o a l l e v i a t e t h i s problem, and is on the ADEM p r i o r i t y list for eventual funding, now t h a t hdmore's i n f i l t r a t i o n /

inflow study has been completed.

Because of the high strength of the industrial SMALL TREATMENT PLANTS Three i n s t i t u t i o n s i n Limestone County are served by small package sewage treatment plants.

The Tanner school is i n an area proposed t o be served by the county waste water system ( provided the c i t y of Athens does not annex Tanner.)

The t w o schools should connect to the larger systems when completed.

Hospital, a small hospital a t Lester, is located i n a area expected t o ex-perience very l i t t l e growth and the hospital w i l l probably have t o continue t o r e l y on package treatment.

The East Limestone School i s i n an area expected t o undergo considerable growth during the t i m e span of t h i s report, but it w i l l probably prove t o be economically infeasible t o incorporate i n a n area system.

Jackson STANDARDS

1.

Provide service with a minimum size l i n e of 8 inches.

2.

Provide a treatment design capacity i n excess of present need a t a minimum of ten years service.

3.

Consolidate sewer interceptor and collection systems into one uni-t a r y treatment system on a watershed basis.

4.

Discourage the expansion of package treatment plants.

Encourage surrounding service areas t o be served by a conventional treatment system.

5.

Encourage the use of secondary (biological) treatment a s w e l l as primary (solids removal) treatment.

The Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) requires a minimum of secondary treatment, as well as primary treatment.

Systems should be de-signed so as t o incorporate t e r t i a r y treatment a t a l a t e r date.

RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1 9 8 3 - 2 0 0 0 (UNINCORPORATED L I M E S T O N E C O U N T Y )

SOUTH LIMESTONE COUNTY ( Pryor Field-General Motors-Community College Area--

Existing System)

The County of Limestone has been funded by the Environmental Protection Agency for a grant t o enable them t o connect with the Decatur Waste water dis-posal system.

This connection is made by means of a 16-inch force main under the Tennessee River (Wheeler Lake).

Included i n the system is an addition t o the Decatur waste treatment plant to accommodate the additional volume of do-mestic and industrial waste from south Limestone County.

Limestone County served includes a large industrial complex, including the General Motors Plant, Junior College, and Pryor Field Airport.

The system should be expanded t o the Spring Branch Creek watershed along 1-65 and 1-565.

The area i n South

TANNER (System Proposed f o r Development)

The area should develop a waste water collection system t o serve both Tanner N o i n d u s t r i a l wastes are ex-and the residential areas along U.S. Hwy 31. The number of gallons t o be served by t h i s system by 2000 should be about 200,000 gal/day.

pected t o be treated by the municipal system.

A 300,000 gal/day capacity sewage treatment is proposed.

Spring Creek (7-day, ten-year recurrence i n t e r v a l flow of 160,000 gal/day) which f l o w s i n t o the r e l a t i v e l y shallow Spring Creek embayment of Wheeler Reservoir.

(Eventual incorporation i n t o the Athens c i t y system may void t h i s recommendation).

The receiving stream f o r the t r e a t e d, e f f l u e n t should be The treatment f a c i l i t y should be designed i n accordance with the definition of "best practicable treatment" (secondary treatment and n i t r i f i c a t i o n ). The ADEN is responsible f o r determining what additional l e v e l s of waste treatment be-yond best practicable may be required.

OTHER AREAS OF LIMESTONE COUNTY The incorporated areas of L e s t e r and Mooresville a r e not expected t o undergo urban development t o a level needing sanitary sewer systems.

undergoing development i n unincorporated areas, such a s East Limestone County, are also considered t o have a level of development which could not feasible support a sanitary sewer system between 1983-2000.

t o r e l y on s e p t i c tanks and t i l e f i e l d s where percolation t e s t s indicate proper s o i l conditions.

A possible exception t o these general statements could be the French M i l l area.

In addition, areas These areas must continue 136

I I

I I-I I

1 1

I I

I I

I t

I I

I I

I 1

i 1.

CHAPTER 6 TRANSPORTATION PLAN F u t u r e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n planning must s t r i k e a balance between t h e regional and local aspects of t h e total problem i f it is t o be successful.

Where an a r e a is part of a metropolitan region and is located along one or more of its major t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s, as is t h e case i n Limestone County, a s u b s t a n t i a l amount of t r a f f i c t r a v e l i n g i n t o or o u t of t h e region as w e l l a s t o and from l o c a l p o i n t s must be accommodated.

I t is a l s o important t o take i n t o account t h e need t o p r e s e r v e t h e c h a r a c t e r of t h e a r e a surrounding t h e road.

A network of roads which is e s t a b l i s h e d without a proper c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r t h i s need could r e s u l t i n s u b s t a n t i a l d e t e r i o r a t i o n of t h e environment.

One of t h e m o s t d i f f i c u l t problems faced by a r a p i d l y growing county i s providing f o r t h e roads and highways necessary t o s e r v e p r e s e n t and f u t u r e de-velopment.

I t is t h e r e f o r e an important f a c e t of t h e Limestone County Compce-hensive Plan t o thoroughly consider t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and functioning of t h e countys p r e s e n t road system with a view towards i n c r e a s i n g s a f e t y, convenience, and e f f i c i e n c y, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n l i g h t of f u t u r e p l a n s and p r o j e c t i o n s.

For t h e m o s t part, t h e e x i s t i n g s t a t e road alignments provide t h e b a s i c network of major roads, and t h e e x i s t i n g county roads provide t h e b a s i c network of c o l l e c t o r roads i n t h e county.

Together t h e s e handle t h e bulk of p r e s e n t and f u t u r e t r a f f i c movements through and between v a r i o u s s e c t i o n s of Limestone County.

GOALS One of t h e f i r s t s t e p s i n t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n planning process is to d e f i n e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n g o a l s.

With t h i s i n mind, t h e Limestone County Commission has adopted t h e following t r a n s p o r t a t i o n g o a l s :

-- To maintain a continuous review and updating of t h e major street and highway plan j o i n t l y by t h e Limestone County Commission, County Engineering Department, t h e Top of Alabama Regional Council of Govern-ments, and, where s t a t e highways a r e involved with t h e Alabama Highway Department.

-- To cooperate with o t h e r governmental agencies toward development of a coordinated t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system f o r Limestone County.

This system should :

C 1 3 7

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

To Minimize t r a v e l times between the various areas of a c t i v i t y.

Provide f o r the f r e e flow of people and goods through and within t h e county and eliminate lack of access t o isolated areas of the county.

Minimize t h e amount of land required f o r c i r c u l a t i o n within the l i m i t s of convenience.

Minimize t h e hazards and undesirable e f f e c t s of a i r p o r t f a c i l i t i e s i n surrounding areas.

Ensure t h a t adequate parking w i l l be present f o r a l l f a c i l i t i e s which have need of it.

Systematically upgrade a l l substandard roads i n Limestone County which are deemed necessary t o service t h e residents of the county.

Provide a highway network which is orderly and can be understood by v i s i t o r s and r e s i d e n t s unfamiliar with its arrangement.

Ensure s a f e t y and convenience of pedestrians by minimizing the c o n f l i c t s of major pedestrian and vehicular paths.

Encourage the orderly and timely development of both commercial and general aviation where necessary and f e a s i b l e.

Encourage the provision of r a i l service t o a l l functions i n t h e planning region which require it.

Promote t h e consolidation of r a i l l i n e s and t h e elimination of un-necessary duplicate tracks and r a i l r o a d grade crossings wherever possible.

Program t h e balanced expansion of a i r transportation f a c i l i t i e s t o keep pace with growing needs.

e s t a b l i s h a p r i o r i t y l i s t i n g f o r the p r o j e c t u n i t s i n the t o t a l system.

To reserve right-of-way and provide f o r frontage improvements a s a con-d i t i o n t o a l l land development as required f o r the f u t u r e transportation network.

To e s t a b l i s h design criteria and maintenance procedures f o r landscaping of major streets and highways t o make such roadways more pleasant f o r t h e t r a v e l i n g public while minimizing t h e detrimental e f f e c t s of major t r a f f i c ways on abutting properties.

To provide a system f o r coordination and management of existing and proposed f a c i l i t i e s with adequate preventative maintenance.

138

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I

-- To promote t h e enhancement of harmonious transportation corridor land use r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t support t h e economic, physical and s o c i a l devel-opment of t h e county.

-- To develop, i n accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, scenic routes leading to major r e c r e a t i o n a l areas.

- -- To develop c a p i t a l improvements programming to e f f e c t i v e l y implement transportation p r o j e c t s according t o physical and f i n a n c i a l constraints and p r i o r i t i e s.

To increase c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e development and evaluation of both s h o r t and long-range transportation plans.

,, -- To e s t a b l i s h a well-structured c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of roads and highways designed to perform the d i f f e r e n t functions and i n t r i n s i c land use considerations and t r a v e l p a t t e r n s and demands i n t h e county.

-- To insure t h a t t h e transportation syscem serves t o coordinate and complement a l l other community service functions, land use a c t i v i t i e s,

and environmental considerations.

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION The development of an e f f e c t i v e t r a f f i c c i r c d l a t i o n system requires the al-location of functions t o d i f f e r e n t categories of roads.

Each type of road serves a d i f f e r e n t purpose i n t h e c i r c u l a t i o n p a t t e r n and, therefore, should be constructed and maintained according t o i t s function.

I n 1968, the United S t a t e s Deparlment of Trans_prtation began a program of functional c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of a l l public streets and roads i n the nation.

Road c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n A l a b a m a is the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the A l a b a m a Highway Depart-ment working i n conjunction with a state highway c l a s s i f i c a t i o n committee and the l o c a l transportation coordinating committee.

For t h e purposes of t h i s study, the state has been divided i n t o rural areas and urban areas.

In r u r a l areas, t h e followinq c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s have been de-veloped :

Rural P r i n c i p a l Arterial System I n t e r s t a t e System Other Principal Arterials Rural Minor A r t e r i a l Road System R u r a l Collector Road System Major Collector Roads Minor Collector Roads Rural Local Road System 139

I n urban areas, t h e following c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s have been developed:

Urban Principal A r t e r i a l System I n t e r s t a t e Other Freeways and Expressways Other Principal Arterials Urban Minor A r t e r i a l S t r e e t System Urban Collector S t r e e t System Urban Local S t r e e t System I n the transportation plan f o r Limestone County, t h e following road clas-s i f i c a t i o n s are u t i l i z e d :

Principal Arterials--Major streets and roads used f o r high volume t r a f f i c movement t o, within, and through the county.

Major Collectors--Major streets and roads used f o r t r a f f i c of moderate-to-f a s t speeds and r e l a t i v e l y high t r a f f i c volumes between communities t o be re-quired i n Lester, E a s t Limestone, and Tanner.

Many of these roads should be widened where possible and extensive maintenance completed.

I n addition, a l l roads w i l l require improved marking.

A l l unpaved roads i n t h i s area should be graded and paved.

An organized road i d e n t i f i c a t i o n system and road markers should be imple-mented f o r a l l county-maintained roads not bearing route numbers.

roads do not have e i t h e r names o r numbers, and most roads have no markings.

Roads bearing name signs a r e not marked according t o any uniform marking system.

Most county i

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The Limestone County Planning Program recommends t h e construction of the following new roads, i n t h e order indicated, i n order t o open up areas of the county presently i s o l a t e d and t o allow f o r the f u l l development of these areas.

A r t e r i a l s

1. The State Highway Department proposes t h e construction of I n t e r s t a t e 565 t o commence a t a new interchange with 1-65, of the present 1-65 Alabama 20 interchange.

The new 1-565 w i l l course east-northeast, south of Greenbrier, i n t o Madison County.

An interchange w i l l be provided a t Mooresville.

changes a t Greenbrier and County Line R o a d.

The one a t Greenbriar is already approved by t h e ASHD.

Consideration should a l s o be given t o i n t e r -

2.

Alabama 53 i s proposed by the S t a t e Highway Department t o be improved along t h e current alignment through northeastern Limestone County.

This route would provide an arterial route from Huntsville t o 1-65 140 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 1

I I

I I

I I

I 1

1 I

I I

I I

I near Ardmore.

Section Road t o 1-65.

This route would then t r z v e r s e the r a i l r o a d tracks south of Ardmore t o interchange with 1-65 a t the existing A r d m o r e (south) interchange.

The improved route would then run west along Elkwood Collectors

1. The czunty road from t h e 1-65 Thatch Interchange t o Elkmont has been constructed t o Federal Aid Secondary Road standards.

This road serves the Elkmont I n d u s t r i a l Park with access t o 1-65.

In addition, t h i s road w i l l be extended eastward t o connect with the proposed Principal A r t e r i a l realignment i n t h e Alabama Highway 53 t r a f f i c corridor.

This road is a l s o proposed t o be extended w e s t t o S t a t e Road 127, t o the entrance t o the TC'A-s2onsored Elkmont Rural Village.

Thus, Rural Village t r a f f i c w i l l gain d i r e c t access t o 1-65, to the east, and along the route, t o the Ellhnont Indus-t r i a l Park.

2.

Realignment of County Road 84 from Alabama tiighwty 127 t o County Road 90.

access to t h e proposed i n d u s t r i a l area north of.=-=hens and 1-65.

This realignment w i l l provide westerr. county employment 3.

New routing of County Road 24 e a s t and west of Csunty Road 29.

present routing e x i s t s for t h i s proposed r e a l i q m e n t.

No

4.

Shanghai Road (County Road) should be added t o the Federal Aid Secondary System t o provide access from the raFiEly developing West Limestone County area eastward t o t h e ecor.ozic hub of Lime-stone County, the urban area of Athens.

Local Roads

1. The county road fram Lester t o Beulah Church neEds complete recon-s t r u c t i o n, including new bridges f o r Sugar Creek and its t r i b u t a r i e s.

2.

New alignments w i l l eventually be neede2 I n sonf-. Limestone County near t h e General Motors Plant area.

Air2crz 3 0 ~ 5,

oryor Road, and i n t e r s e c t i n g routes w i l l need e i t h e r repai;ir.q o r realignment, de-pending upon the new growth i n t h e area.

POLICIES The following set of p o l i c i e s describes overall p o l i c i e s zo TJide decision-making regarding any given transportation e f f o r t : i n a < d i t i c n, 2 f-iurther set of p o l i c i e s p e r t a i n s t o s p e c i f i c areas of transportation planninq m d implementa-t i o n :

1. The s a f e t y and traffic-carrying capacity of interchange areas and arterial c o r r i d o r s should be protected from adverse laxd development.

(Interchange areas and arterial corridors a t t r a c c intensive areawide growth which can ultimately undermine the efficient-J and s a f e use of 141

these routes.

ing near these r o u t e s as e f f e c t i v e access t o the transportation system is needed by major land uses.

However, regulations should assure t h a t t h e intensive growth w i l l not overtax thoroughfare capacity.

New de-velopment should m e e t acceptable site standards:

access control, the provision of s u i t a b l e service roads, o f f - s t r e e t parking and loading, etc. )

County development should not be discouraged from locat-

2.

A d i v e r s i f i e d highway system, which includes the use of the same routes i n appropriate areas, should be created i n the county.

3.

Establish a well-structured transportation system t o insure unity of community, convenience of. c i t i z e n s, and operation of public i n s t i t u t i o n a l and commercial f a c i l i t i e s by allowing persons t o move about e a s i l y,

s a f e l y and without s i g n i f i c a n t interruption.

4.

Promote the enhancement of harmonious transportation corridor-land use and sector r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t support the economic, physical, and s o c i a l development of t h e county.

5.

Develop c a p i t a l improvements programming t o e f f e c t i v e l y implement transportation p r o j e c t s according t o physical and f i n a n c i a l constraints and p r i o r i t i e s.

6.

Increase c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the development and evaluation of both short-and long-range transportation plans.

7.

Insure t h a t t h e transportation system serves t o coordinate and comple-ment a l l other cannuunity service functions, land use a c t i v i t i e s, and en-vironmen t a 1 cons i d e r a t ions.

8.

Encourage sound development patterns i n the Athens c e n t r a l business area through coordination and best use of various t r a v e l methods which a i d new land development and redevelopment of decaying areas.

T H O R O U G H F A R E S

1. Establish a c u r r e n t and viable thoroughfare system f o r the area which sets f o r t h provision f o r t h e development, redevelopment, improvement, extension and r e v i s i o n of arterials, c o l l e c t o r s, and other (local) county roads.

2.

The thoroughfare plan must be within the reasonable and foreseeable f i n a n c i a l c a p a b i l i t i e s of the community and should follow the improve-ment schedule established i n the adopted Limestone County Comprehensive Plan subject t o most recent localized evaluations.

3.

The planned thoroughfare system should be designed and implemented t o operate as a t o t a l and integrated system t o accommodate and serve e x i s t i n g and anticipated t r a v e l demand e f f i c i e n t l y.

1 4 2 I

I I

i

I, I

I I

1 I

I I

I 1

I 1

1 I

I I

I I

I

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

c Establish a well-structured hierarchy of streets designed t o -perform the d i f f e r e n t functions basic t o land use considerations and travel patterns and demands i n the county area.

The thoroughfare plan should r e f l e c t the high standards of geometric design as w e l l as high aesthetic standards and a t t r a c t i v e lanciscaping.

The thoroughfare system should provide e f f e c t i v e connections with a i r and r a i l t r a v e l f a c i l i t i e s and r e f l e c t the use of major s t r e e t s and highways by a l l u s e r s.

Rights-of-way f o r major transportation routes should be acquired o r legally established i n advance o r a t the time of development i n ac-cordance with the Comprehensive Plan.

L e s s e r transportation routes, which d i r e c t l y serve and a r e dependent upon the design of adjoining land uses, should not be established u n t i l the time of land ?evelop-ment.

The a r t e r i a l should serve a s a connecting l i n k between r e s i d e 2 t i a l and r u r a l areas and t h e i r major service f a c i l i t i e s such as ccnrmrnity business areas, community civic or c u l t u r a l centers, and seccndary schools.

The collector should serve a s a connecting link between r e s i c i n t i a l and r u r a l neighborhoods as w e l l a s accommodating the lesser t r a f f i c volumes generated between r e s i d e n t i a l and r u r a l cormrmnities.

The collector should serve as a connecting l i n k between r e s i c e n t i a l areas and those f a c i l i t i e s which serve primarily one communi~~

or p a r t s of several neighborhoods such as neighborhood ccmmercizl area, junior high school, o r community recreation center.

The collector should be located where it can c o l l e c t and dis'cibute t r a f f i c from a r t e r i a l routes t o l e s s important s t r e e t s o r d i r e c t l y t o t r a f f i c destinations.

Local county roads should be located within areas where t5ey a r e desiqned t o c o l l e c t and d i s t r i b u t e local t r a f f i c only and serve those f a c i l i t i e s located within the a r e a, such a s the elementary school.

Local county roads should be located on a r u r a l cornunity boundaries where they are designed t o servemore than one area o r l a r g e r f a c i l i t i e s such as junior high schools, community parks and recreation centers, and churches.

14 3

CHAPTER 7 LAND USE PLAN The Limestone County Land Use Plan i s proposed as an instrument for combin-ing county development objectives, public and private action programs and s p e c i f i c improvement projects i n t o a unified policy instrument.

A land use plan holds no l e g a l status, but can serve as a basis f o r more d e f i n i t i v e l e g i s l a t i v e and administrative measures such a s land use controls and policies regarding the extension of public services and f a c i l i t i e s.

must be general and f l e x i b l e i n order t o be adaptable t o changing physical, s o c i a l,

economic, and techological patterns which may occur during the planning period.

The plan GOALS 'AND 'OBJECTIVES Recognition of community needs and a t t i t u d e s i s a necessary prerequisite t o the development of a land use plan.

ha.ve been formulated for Limestone County:

The following land use goals and objectives G O A L ACHIEVE A BALANCE AMONG VARIOUS LAND USES M ACCOMMODATE A DIVERSITY OF TOTAL LIFE STYLES WHICH WILL FULFILL THE RE-QUIREMENTS OF COUNTY RESIDENTS.

Objective 1: Promote a v a r i e t y of housing type,s and a high level of e f f i -

ciency i n r e s i d e n t i a l development patterns.

a.

i n order to provide more heterogeneous development

b.

Encourage the assembly of land i n t o large t r a c t s a t suit-able locations t o be developed with compatible mixtures of r e s i d e n t i a l d e n s i t i e s and other land uses.

Encourage the development of mixtures of dwelling types Objective 2:

Promote the s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of various land uses which w i l l r e s u l t i n a compatible relationship of land use a c t i v i t i e s.

a.

Residential areas should contain the necessary supporting local service uses and should have adequate access through the transportation system to employment, commercial, and secon-dary school f a c i l i t i e s,

b.

concentrated a c t i v i t y, o r those areas reasonably projected a s centers.

c.

Other commercial development should be located along major thoroughfares and should have limited access i n order to minimize t r a f f i c c o n f l i c t s and maximize t r a f f i c efficiency.

Regional commercial uses should be located i n centers of P

144 I

I I

1 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 1

I 1

I I

I' I

I 1

I I

I I

1 I

1 I

1 I

1 I

I I

I

d.

Industrial uses should have d i r e c t access to highways and railroads, and reasonable access t o airport f a c i l i t i e s and re-s i d e n t i a l areas.

Objective 3:

Provide land for a wide variety of employment opportunities for the residents.

a.

Provide the opportunity f o r expansion of employment areas to assist i n keeping the f a c i l i t i e s i n scale with demand and technological advances.

b.

Provide a variety of desirabl-e s i t e s for industrial uses adequate both for present use and future expansion.

c.

Provide for industrial park development while providing locations f o r those industries which economically require more densely developed land.

d.

Provide industrial s i t e s a t suitable locations adjacent to high volume t r a f f i c arteries which a r e i n demand for t h e i r v i s i b i l i t y potential.

e.

Provide industrial s i t e s adjacent t o the Huntsville-Madison Jetplex f o r use by high technology-oriented companies.

The eastern side (Madison County side) of the Jetplex Ms acquired several high-technology companies; the western siee (Limestone county side) also has potential f o r such develo-ment.

LAND USE PROPOSALS The Land U s e Plan i d e n t i f i e s the proposed development pattern of Limestone County by delineating the location, type, and intensity of the various land use categories.

These categories of land use, described below are: medium and high density urban development, l o w density urban development, rural density residen-t i a l and agricultural development, major areas of industrial potential, and open space and conservation.

For the purpose of guiding development, the land area within Linestone County has been c l a s s i f i e d according t o intensity of use.

The specific recommen-dations as t o the most suitable density for the various sections of the county w e r e based on the consideration of various factors:

a.

Areas presently served o r planned t o be served i n the future by public water and sewer service are most suitable or higher densities of development.

b.

Land capabilities should be important factors i n determining de-velopment density.

For those areas not served by public water and s e w e r service, areas with soil and topographic conditions m o s t suit-able f o r building construction should be u t i l i z e d for higher density development.

Lands l e a s t able to support mre intensive uses should be maintained for lower density development.

Areas of open space and ecological significance are most appropriate f o r the low densities of development.

1 4 5

c.

g r e a t e r road access o p p o r t u n i t i e s.

With the automobile a s t h e prime mode o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n Limestone County, d e n s i t i e s of developnent should relate to t h e major roadways.

Higher d e n s i t y development i s more a p p r o p r i a t e i n a r e a s with d.

Areas having g r e a t e r proximity to o t h e r p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s and s e r v i c e s are most s u i t a b l e for developments of higher densities.

w M ED I U MU-H I G H: D E N S I TY' D E V E L O P M E N T Urban development should occur contiguous t o e x i s t i n g areas o f high d e n s i t y development where urban services and f a c i l i t i e s are a v a i l a b l e o r can be provided.

Medium and high d e n s i t y development a r e a s, a s i n d i c a t e d on t h e Lar.6 Use Plan Map, w i l l be s e r v i c e d with p u b l i c water and sewer s e r v i c e.

The primary land use i n t h e s e development a r e a s a r e r e s i d e n c i d, with a w i d e range of housing as to type and with a minimum d e n s i t y of focr &-elling u n i t s per acre.

Lot s i z e s w i l l c o n s i s t of an average o f 10,OOC s y ~ a r e f e e t. The high c o s t of p u b l i c s e r v i c e s, such as paved s t r e e t s, water and s e w e r, and o t h e r f a c i l i t i e s is t h e major reason or t h e d e n s i t i e s t h a t a r e pro-ps?C.

The medium and high d e n s i t y urban development a r e a s i n c l u < s :r.duscrial s i t e s,

commercial areas s u i t a b l e f o r convenience shopping, i n additior. 2s zr23s of open space with supporting community f a c i l i t i e s i n c l o s e proximity, 5. ~ ~ 3.

I S schoclls, p a r k s and playgrounds.

H I G H I N T E N S I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T S E C T O R S Access to t h e major t r a n s p o r t a t i o n network i s a major res_-irt=enc i n t h e A s land uses become rare intexs:r:s, z:?tre i s an l o c a t i o n of county l a n d uses.

i n c r e a s i n g importance for access t o major t r a n s p o r t a t i o n arteries.

t o t h e major thoroughfare network is a major factor i n i n f l u e n c i n g rhs l o c a l l a n d use development p a t t e r n.

k c e s s i b i l i t y High i n t e n s i t y development s e c t o r s are d i r e c t l y t i e d t o =:YS z i j c r highways of t h e county.

I n Limestone County, these include c o r r i d o r dey:elcsr=er.c s e c t o r s.

The Corridor Development S e c t o r s are contained within 1,000 fee-sf eizher side of a m a j o r thoroughfare as i n d i c a t e d on t h e Plan.

Only p o r t i o n s cf highways hav-i n g growth p o t e n t i a l are d e l i n e a t e d a s development c o r r i d o r s.

t h e highway system provide major access t o urbanizing a r e a s of zk.5 =z-nty.

Uses t h a t would be restricted t o t h e l o c a t i o n s i n t h e c o r r i d o r s incl*LCe ?--is:?

d e n s i t y multi-family housing, o f f i c e s and community shopping c e n t e r s.

~Tkzzz

~

r e

uses which have a s t r o n g n e c e s s i t y or a c c e s s i b i l i t y, b u t a r e l e s s 2.t_s~r.Zenc on high-speed t r a f f i c facilities.

T k s 2orrions of LOW DENSITY' URBAN' DEVELOPMENT The low d e n s i t y urban development a r e a s a r e g e n e r a l l y are2.s of ?rimdrily residential development with a lower development d e n s i t y.

l y c o n s i s t of a minimum o f 15,000 square f e e t.

A r e a s i n c l u d e d I?.

~ 2. 1 ~

category w i l l be provided with w a t e r s e r v i c e a s a minimum and w i l l i n c l u e e,

to r e s i d e n t i a l land u s e, o t h e r supporting u s e s such a s schools, ;zr:<s, small com-mercial c e n t e r s, and l i m i t e d i n d u s t r i a l development.

Lot s i z 2 5 xi11 general-Ir. addition I

I I

I I

I I

I I

D I

I 1

I I

1 1

I I

9 146

I I

B I

I I

I B

I I

1 I

I I

1 I

I I

I c

RURAL DENSITY' RESIDENTIAL AND AGRlCULTURAL R u r a l density r e s i d e n t i a l and a g r i c u l t u r a l areas, as designated on the Land U s e Plan, are those areas where the development of urban d e n s i t i e s is undesirable o r unfeasible a t t h i s t i m e due t o remoteness, impermeability, o r shallowness of s o i l s, the absence of the necessary urban services, o r the continuation of farming o r a g r i c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s.

I Rural development areas contain low-density r e s i d e n t i a l development and A major objective of these occasional convenience commercial establishments.

areas is t o accommodate land uses which t o not demand a high l e v e l of urban services, i.e, water and sewer service.

Areas designated as Rural Density and Agricultural should maintain l o t The use of high-quality f a r m land should be discouraged f o r excessive s i z e s a minimum of 40,000 square f e e t i n order to provide both a w e l l and septic tank.

use by non-farm r u r a l r e s i d e n t i a l development.

MAJOR AREAS OF' INDUSTRIAL POTENTIAL Most i n d u s t r i a l development areas within Limestone County are located with-i n o r near t h e major urban areas.

i n d u s t r i a l areas include: (1) e f f i c i e n t and convenient access to transportation f a c i l i t i e s, including rail, highway, a i r and w a t e r ; (2) a c e n t r a l location with respect t o labor, r a w materials, and markets; ( 3 ) s u f f i c i e n t,

s u i t a b l e land which i s f r e e from construction and drainage problems with s u f f i c i e n t reserve f o r f u t u r e expansion; ( 4 ) adequate and r e l i a b l e sources of u t i l i t i e s, including water, waste disposal, and power; (5) protection f r o m encroachment o f residen-t i a l and o t h e r possible c o n f l i c t i n g land uses; (6) l o c a t i o n so as t o minimize obnoxious external effects on neighboring non-industrial land uses; and (7) location within easy commuting distance t o l i v i n g areas and o t h e r work areas SO t h a t a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e d t o one another can e a s i l y s a t i s f y mutual access roads.

Guidelines proposed f o r the development of Several areas have been designated for i n d u s t r i a l growth as shown on the Land U s e Plan.

The areas indicated are sites with a minimum s i z e of 100 acres.

Smaller sites may be developed within t h e urban d e n s i t y areas.

concerning i n d u s t r i a l l o c a t i o n should be u t i l i z e d when determining the location of sites within t h e urban density areas.

The p o l i c i e s The Tennessee Valley Authority i n i t i a l l y i d e n t i f i e d several of t h e in-d u s t r i a l sites indicated on the Land U s e Plan.

A l l t h e sites designated a r e characterized by acceptable s o i l and t e r r a i n p a t t e r n s and bv access t o a t l e a s t one transportation mode.

OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION The areas within Limestone County, which have been designated as open space and conservation areas, areas include land along t h e Tennessee River, Wheeler Lake (including Limestone's portion of Joe Wheeler S t a t e Park and the Tennessee Valley Authority's reservation areas) and the Elk River, as w e l l as Piney Creek, Limestone Creek, Swan C r e e k, Sulphur C r e e k, Round Island Creek, Sugar Creek, and M i l l Creek, and lesser streams, and t h e i r respective t r i b u t a r i e s.

14 7

The open space and conservation areas of the County should remain i n t h e i r natural state with a l l types of development discouraged.

Recreational, agricul-t u r a l, and forestry purposes could, however, be served.

LAND USE POLICIES The p o l i c i e s recommended i n t h i s section represent what is feasible as well as desirable f o r an orderly growth and development p a t t e r n i n Limestone County.

They are designed t o provide a clear and consistent b a s i s f o r the Comprehensive Plan and f o r government programs designed to implement the Plan.

These policies, i f accepted, can be t r a n s l a t e d d i r e c t l y i n t o a public action plan.

The primary goal to be achieved through t h e Limestone County Planning Pro-gram is the creation of an environment t h a t adequately m e e t s the physical, s o c i a l and economic needs of t h e County's residents.

R E S I D E N T I A L D E V E L O P M E N T

1.

A greater variety and broader range of r e s i d e n t i a l housing types and den-sities Should be encouraged so t h a t a choice of housing is available f o r a l l Limestone County residents.

2.

Subdivision development on s o i l s not s u i t a b l e f o r r e s i d e n t i a l development should be discouraged.

3.

variety of communities i n Limestone County.

a l s o be supported i n areas experiencing growth o r increased employment opportuni-ties.

Housing for low-and moderate-income residents should be supported i n a The location of such housing should

4.

able o r planned should be discouraged.

The development of unsewered housing i n areas where public sewer i s avail-

5.

Safe, adequate and sound design and construction standards or a l l types and c o s t l e v e l s of housing should be encouraged.

6.

of housing needs as w e l l as commercial and open space uses should be encouraged.

The development of planned r e s i d e n t i a l areas large enough t o m e e t a variety

7.

Existing housing areas should be recognized and e f f o r t s f o r improvement and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n should be supported and encouraged.

8.

Distribute and design public f a c i l i t i e s t o provide maximum service t o re-s i d e n t i a l areas.

9.

ment areas, community f a c i l i t i e s and the transportation system.

Residential development should be r e l a t e d to e x i s t i n g and proposed employ-

10.

Legislation which would permit governmental regulations (including building and housing codes, land use and subdivision regulations) t h a t assist i n providing f o r adequate housing should be supported and encouraged.

implementing what enabling l e g i s l a t i o n he currently has to u t i l i z e.

The County Engineer i s I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

I 1

I I

I 1

I I

P 148

11.

Residential d e n s i t y p a t t e r n s which relate t o n a t u r a l and man-made assets should be developed.

12.

Avoid wasteful use of prime a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d and conserve valuable land and water resources f o r t h e f u t u r e i n r e s i d e n t i a l development.

13.

Residential development, except rural d e n s i t y, should be provided with p u b l i c improvements prior t o development.

should be required t o have p u b l i c s e w e r and water facilities.

By furnishing p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s i n advance of development, local governments can guide de-velopment and i n s u r e t h e e f f i c i e n t use of p u b l i c expenditures.

Medium d e n s i t y housing i n t h e county -.

14.

Housing market data, i n c l u d i n g f o r e c a s t s on market a c t i v i t i e s and popula-t i o n p r o j e c t i o n s and t r e n d s, should be furnished t o r e s i d e n t i a l developers i n order to serve t h e housing needs of t h e county more e f f e c t i v e l y.

15.

Policy for r e s i d e n t i a l d e n s i t i e s :

POLICLY FOR RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES Density Type Units Per A c r e - Sq. F t. P e r Unit U t i l i t i e s Required High Density 4.8/12.5*

9,000/12,000 +

Water and Sewer 3,000* for each a d d i t i o n a l u n i t Medium Density 4.1 10,500 Water and Sewer Low Density 2.8 15, 000 Water/On-site Rural/Agricul-1. 0 43,560 O n - s i t e well/on-t u r a l Density site septic tank Septic Tank

• Multi-family s t r u c t u r e s o n l y HIGH D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L D E V E L O P M E T

1.

The l o c a t i o n of housing i n areas served by p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s, including s a n i t a r y sewers should be encouraged.

2.

A r e a s of high d e n s i t i e s should be dependent on t h e amount and types of p u b l i c improvements a v a i l a b l e or planned.

Multi-family r e s i d e n t i a l development should :

a.

B e located a d j a c e n t t o major thoroughfare r o u t e ;

1 4 '?

b.

Have s a n i t a r y sewers with minimum l i n e s i z e of e i g h t (8) inches, storm sewers, and water l i n e s a minimum of s i x (6) inches.

c.

Have a l l p u b l i c improvements i n e x i s t e n c e or programmed i n t h e c a p i t a l improvements budget before development occurs;

d.

Have f i r e p r o t e c t i o n s e r v i c e within 1 3/4 m i l e s.

e.

A maximum allowed d e n s i t y of f i v e (5) s i n g l e family dwelling u n i t s may be employed i n high d e n s i t y urban r e s i d e n t i a l development areas.

A maximum of 12.5 multi-family dwelling u n i t s may be allowed i n t h e high d e n s i t y r e s i d e n t i a l areas.

3.

A l l high d e n s i t y development proposed f o r Limestone County by e i t h e r p u b l i c or p r i v a t e agencies should t a k e place i n t h e areas described i n t h e Comprehensive Plan.

MEDIUM D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L DEVELOPMENT

1.

Water l i n e s with a minimum s i z e of s i x (6) i n c h e s and s a n i t a r y sewer with l i n e s a minimum of e i g h t (8) i n c h e s should be provided t o a l l a r e a s designated f o r medium and high d e n s i t y r e s i d e n t i a l development.

2.

A l l land uses n o t devoted t o r e s i d e n t i a l needs should be excluded from a l l r e s i d e n t i a l areas.

D i s t r i b u t i o n of non-residential land uses intended t o serve r e s i d e n t i a l uses o f l a n d, such as shopping c e n t e r s and churches, should be l o c a t e d on t h e basis of providing convenient access t o county r e s i d e n t s.

3.

Medium d e n s i t y r e s i d e n t i a l development should be separated from high d e n s i t y development and o t h e r non-residential uses with open space b u f f e r s.

4.

Medium d e n s i t y r e s i d e n t i a l areas should be developed with convenient ease of movement f r o m l i v i n g areas t o work and leisure-time areas.

5.

A maximum allowed d e n s i t y i n o u t l y i n g r u r a l areas should be t w o ( 2 )

dwelling u n i t s p e r gross acre.

Where o u t l y i n g areas are s u s c e p t i b l e t o urban r e s i d e n t i a l development, t h e d e n s i t y should be allowed to a t least four u n i t s per acre provided s t a n d a r d s for urban development are also m e t.

LOW D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L DEVELOPMENT

1.

Water service w i t h a minimum l i n e s i z e of six (6) inches should be pro-vided i n t h e s e areas.

2.

Sewer service w i t h a minimum l i n e s i z e of e i g h t (8) inches should be pro-vided i n t h e s e areas, i f f e a s i b l e, provided h i g h e r d e n s i t y areas are served with such service f i r s t on a p r i o r i t y b a s i s.

3.

A maximum d e n s i t y of 2. 8 dwelling u n i t s p e r g r o s s a c r e should be provided i n t h e s e l o w d e n s i t y areas.

150 D

RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL R E S I D E N T I A L DEVELOPMENT

1.

i n areas of the county where:

A maximum density o f one housing u n i t per gross acre should be encouraged

a.

A r u r a l character or estate uses are e x i s t i n g o r proposed.

b.

Slopes exceed 20 percent o r the area is subject t o flood hazard.

2.

I n those portions of t h e county now predominantly r u r a l i n character, re-s i d e n t i a l d e n s i t i e s of no more than three u n i t s per gross acre should be encour-aged adjoining e x i s t i n g town c e n t e r development.

v i c i n i t y of the towns of Lester and Mooresville.

Such areas would be i n the COMMERCIAL D E V E L O P M E N T

1.

Commercial areas should be located so as t o have a maximum a c c e s s i b i l i t y t o trade area population.

2.

Commercial development should be discouraged on s o i l s t h a t are not s u i t a b l e f o r commercial development.

3.

S t r i p commercial development should be contained i n concentrated groups by providing controlled p o i n t s of egress and ingress.

4.

Provide f o r the location of a l l commercial sites so t h a t convenient and s a f e access can be provided f o r customers, employees and suppliers.

5.

Scattered commercial locations should be discouraged i n a g r i c u l t u r a l areas where they may r e s u l t i n d i s r u p t i v e t r a v e l p a t t e r n s o r become incompatible with a g r i c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s.

6.

Multi-purpose commercial c e n t e r development should be strongly encouraged.

These centers contain a v a r i e t y of commercial, c u l t u r a l, and recreational faci-l i t i e s and are designed t o s a t i s y t h e needs of area r e s i d e n t s i n one place a t one t i m e.

7.

Ensure t h a t commercial development be served by public u t i l i t i e s including s a n i t a r y s e w e r s, with t h e possible exception of highway commercial centers t h a t are properly located but beyond t h e reach of public u t i l i t i e s.

8.

Adequate provision should be made f o r o f f - s t r e e t parking, access and in-t e r n a l vehicular c i r c u l a t i o n t o minimize commercial t r a f f i c c o n f l i c t s with through t r a f f i c movements on adjacent thoroughfares.

CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL D E V E L O P M E N T

1.

Convenience commercial area needs normally can be served adequately by 2 t o 3 acres of developed comercial land.

2.

Convenient access t o a convenience commercial area is provided by s t r e e t s which are designed to carry the additional t r a f f i c generated by the business f a c i l i t y, a s well a s residential t r a f f i c from the surrounding commercial trad-ing or service area.

3.

A convenience commercial area should be located a t the junction of two minor collectors, o r a minor and a major collector, central w i t h i n its trade -

area and a t a point best serving two or more elementary school service areas or parts thereof.

COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT

1.

range from 3 t o 5 acres, depending upon the p o t e n t i a l trade area population, the design of the business area, and the amount of land allocated for general commercial uses w i t h i n the commercial area.

Total developed land area requirements f o r community commercial areas may

2.

and r e t a i l services t o areas of 1,000 to 10,000 population.

Community commercial centers should provide multi-faceted business, o f f i c e,

3.

a minor a r t e r i a l and major collector or a t the intersection of two major collec-tors.

The community commercial center area should be located a t the junction of 4.

cess and e x i t, adequate off-street, parking and loading f a c i l i t i e s, proper size and shape of t r a c t, service by publ'ic u t i l i t i e s, and relationship t o adjacent residential areas.

Community commercial centers require detailed consideration of t r a f f i c ac-HIGHWAY C O M M E R C I A L DEVELOPMENT

1.

The development of highway commercial centers and intersection areas should be controlled so as t o avoid disruptive travel patterns and t r a f f i c conflicts.

2.

S t r i p commercial areas along s t r e e t s and highways as well as development of commercial uses improperly related t o surrounding land uses should be avoided.

3.

A balanced distribution of commercial centers should be encouraged i n the County.

County and local centers should be located so t h a t a l l residential areas a r e adequately served and travel t i m e s i n reaching commercial centers are mini-mized.

4.

Special highway commercial d i s t r i c t s should be developed which would re-quire coordinated consolidation of existing centers, provisions for sufficient o f f - s t r e e t parking and off-street loading f a c i l i t i e s, well located but not ex-cessive egress points, and provision f o r buffering when such commercial d i s t r i c t s abutt residential areas.

5.

nature should replace the uncontrolled s t r i p commercial pattern.

Organized, l i n i a r highway-oriented commercial d i s t r i c t s of a compact P

1 5 2

INDUSTRIAL D E V E L O P M E N T

1.

Locate i n d u s t r i a l a r e a s where f a s t, convenient access to t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s, including r a i l, highway and a i r, can be provided.

The a r e a near t h e J e t p l e x and near Saginaw S t e e r i n g Gear are such areas.

2.

Encourage t h e c l u s t e r i n g of i n d u s t r i a l u s e s i n planned i n d u s t r i a l parks i n or adjacent t o e x i s t i n g c e n t e r s o f development.

3.

Isolated i n d u s t r i a l l o c a t i o n s i n a g r i c u l t u r a l areas should be discouraged where they may r e s u l t i n environmental d e t e r i o r a t i o n or d i s r u p t i v e t r a v e l p a t t e r n s or become incompatible w i t h a g r i c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s.

4.

Located i n d u s t r i e s i n areas where they w i l l have adequate expansion space to m e e t a n t i c i p a t e d f u t u r e needs.

Expansion of i n d u s t r y a t t h e p r e s e n t s i t e s should be encouraged.

5.

Locate i n d u s t r i a l a r e a s so t h a t they are r e a d i l y accessible from r e s i d e n t i a l areas and a r e v i s u a l l y and f u n c t i o n a l l y compatible w i t h them.

6.

I n t h e l o c a t i o n of i n d u s t r i e s, an adequate and reliable supply of u t i l i t i e s should be a v a i l a b l e :

w a t e r, waste d i s p o s a l, power and fuel.

7.

Recognize t h e need f o r new i n d u s t r y and employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s for smaller o u t l y i n g towns and communities as w e l l as t h e major urbanizing areas and to en-courage t h i s i n d u s t r i a l development.

8.

Encourage i n d u s t r i a l development on s o i l s t h a t are s u i t a b l e f o r i n d u s t r i a l development.

The standard f o r determining s u i t a b i l i t y s h a l l be s o i l s t h a t do n o t have severe or very severe l i m i t a t i o n s f o r i n d u s t r i a l development as determined by t h e U.S.

S o i l Conservation service survey of Limestone County.

The land area should be capable of being graded without undue expense and should n o t have a slope of over five percent.

9.

I n d u s t r i a l development should be within reasonable l o c a t i o n t o raw materials, source of labor supply, and market demand.

10.

Public improvements should be provided i n advance f o r a r e a s with a high i n -

d u s t r i a l development p o t e n t i a l.

L I G H T I N D U S T R I A L DEVELOPMENT

1.

A wide range of l o c a t i o n a l choices should be made a v a i l a b l e within t h e county t o highly mobile l i g h t i n d u s t r y and wholesaling uses.

2.

Light i n d u s t r i a l uses should be located i n a manner where these uses can provide a t r a n s i t i o n from n o n - i n d u s t r i a l land use t o heavy i n d u s t r i a l land use.

3.

Light i n d u s t r i a l uses should have access t o P r i n c i p a l Arterials and/or Major C o l l e c t o r routes.

4.

The a t t r a c t i o n of l i g h t, non-polluting i n d u s t r y should be encouraged and provided with a p p r o p r i a t e l o c a t i o n s, s u f f i c i e n t l a n d f o r expansion, and s i t e s p r o t e c t e d from encroachment of o t h e r land u s e s.

153

5.

Landscaping and open space should be provided a s buffers between an other-wise detrimental industrial use and sound residential neighborhoods.

HEAVY I N D U S T R I A L D E V E L O P M E N T

1.

Industrial performance standards should be adopted and enforced regarding t h e level of d u s t, smoke, noise, glare and odor emitted from an industrial use.

2.

Industrial areas should be located with access provided only t o major tran-sportation routes which include principal a r t e r i a l routes, major collectors, ma-j o r railroad l i n e s and navigable bodies of water i n order t h a t residential areas may be free of industrial t r a f f i c.

3.

Certain industrial u s e s generate heavy t r a f f i c, noise, smoke o r other nuisances and should be located where it is feasible t o provide an adequate transition, such a s l i g h t i n d u s t r i a l areas, commercial areas o r open space, to adjoining land use types.

4.

Industrial areas not meeting i n d u s t r i a l performance standards should be improved o r eliminated so a s t o eliminate any blighting influence from surround-ing non-industrial uses.

C O N S E R V A T I O N A R E A D E V E L O P M E N T

1.

Land along r i v e r s, streams, lakes, wetlands o r other areas of significant topography including f o r e s t s and woodlands should be acquired and/or preserved a s open space.

2.

Immediate attention should be given t o the preservation of open space cor-ridors within the inner area.of the county where pressures for urbanization a r e greatest.

3.

Adequate open space areas should be provided throughout the county which would discourage urban development i n areas more s u i t a b l e f o r open space, re-training the aesthetic q u a l i t y t h a t only open space can provide.

4.

A l l available implementing and financial devices should be used f o r open space preservation.

5.

State and federal allocation of financial resources should be encouraged for parks and open space to urbanizing areas.

6.

Local communities should be supported a s well as encouraged i n t h e i r ef-f o r t s t o provide parks and open space f o r the community residents.

P 1 5 4

CHAPTER 8 IMPLEMENTATION.

The Comprehensive Plan is of little value to the County unless it can serve as an effective guide for both public and private decisions which fashion the County. However, the effectiveness of the Plan is primarily dependent on two major factors. First, the public should be reasonably informed about all facets of anticipated changes expressed in the form of proposals to be met within the fulfillment of goals and objectives, and the opportunities thus created for them due to long range planning efforts. Second, the plan should seriously be used in its advisory capacity as a creative tool to shape the county's growth and its environment. Therefore, a specific program of implementing actions is necessary to achieve positive results in carrying out the Limestone County Comprehensive Plan.

In order to initiate this continuing program of planning implementation, Limestone County should establish a Planning Commission to update and revise the Comprehensive Plan. This organization will be described in detail as to the legal and administrative duties to undertake Plan fulfillment.

P L A N N I N G

'COMMISSION Alabama counties do not possess the comprehensive planning authority necessary to control the development of territory lying outside the boundaries of incorporated municipalities nor the authority to establish County Planning Commissions. Therefore, in order to establish a Planning Commission, Limestone County would require special legislation. The Planning Commission, which represents all governmental as well as citizen interests in the County, would assist in guiding land use and capital improvement decisions at the county level in order to promote new development without damaging the County's environment or economy. The organization, composed of nine members, including two elected officials, one official in public service representing the development arm of local government, and six citizens chosen for civic interests and involvement by the local governing body, can provide a valuable service in bringing the county citizens into the countywide planning process. In order to organize such an organization of Limestone County citizens interested in the growth and development of the county, the present Limestone County Rural Development Committee could provide the basis or the initiation of a planning commission.

D E V E L O P M E N T CONTROLS LAN.D USE C O N T R O L Land use control measures should be established to serve the public health, safety and general welfare and to provide the social, economic and physical advantages resulting from an orderly planned use of land resources. This implementation measure can assist in preserving prime agricultural land from 155

premature and uncontrolled urban development, not conforming to the comprehensive Plan.

values as well as commercial and industrial investment. The County will require local legislation to implement land use control procedures. The land use regulations should be applied in accordance with all principles and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Additional guidelines in the implementation of land use control measures are:

Land use policies and controls can also serve to protect residential property

a. All land use regulations and policies should be coordinated with the same of incorporated places within the county and bordering counties and cities.

b. The amount of land in each land use category should not be in excess of the foreseeable need plus a reasonable margin for individual choice.

SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS The control of land subdivision is the means by which private land development can be brought into conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and the public interest.

These regulations establish minimum standards of design and construction for all new land development, insure the installation of utilities that may be economically serviced and maintained, insure a coordinated system and sufficient open spaces for recreation and other public services, and establish correlation with adjacent existing or possible future subdivisions. These.controls are necessary if orderly, economical and sound development is to be achieved. Through the adoption and enforcement of such regulations, the design and quality of.land development will be improved, resulting in improved living conditions and stability of property values for county residents.

County to benefit from these regulations.

Local legislation will also be needed for Limestone BUILDING AND HOUSING C O D E S These legal codes (including electrical, plumbing and fire codes) insure safe and sound building construction.

construction and to old-buildings as well.

They can be enacted to apply to new and remodeling Local legislation is needed to give the Limestone County Commission authority If such legislation is approved, for the adoption and enforcement of these codes.

it is recommended that the Southern Standard Building and Housing Codes, as amended, be adopted by Limestone County.

S A N I T A R Y C O D E S Sanitary codes are official controls established by the State and/or County to assure the adequate and safe provisions of water and the proper disposal of sewage in residential subdivisions and for other areas where the public requires such service.

Public water supplies and sewage disposal systems currently must be approved by the State Department of Environmental Management.

regulations regarding the disposal of sewage which must be met.

Health Department has established certain requirements for water supply and sewage This State Agency has certain The Tri-County D

156

I I

I I

I I

1 M

I I

c 1

1 I

t I

i m

APITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAMMING A N D BUDGETING disposal systems which must be met.

therefore, cooperate in the rapid but fair and equal enforcenent of these codes.

All county and municipal agencies should, I /

C O O P E R A T I V E AGREEMENTS Cooperative agreements include any agreement between two or more agencies, whether public, s?mi-public, or private, wherein any projects related to the Comprehensive Plan may be jointly or cooperatively planned, financed, constructed, or administered to be, beneficial to the public.

A primary example of cooperative agreements between operating agencies or departments in Limestone County is in the case of school m.d recreational facilities.

The use of school facilities by recreation and other cornunity groups is allowed by schools throughout the county, in such areas as Tanner xi2 Capshaw, for instance.

Any cooperative arrangement should be encouraged where ir is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and where there are recognizable 5er.efits to be derived.

This is easily recognized in the cooperative agreement bee;een the Commission and County Water Authority, and the City-County Landfill P r o g r a.

C ITIZ E N

'PART1 C IP A TI 0 N '

Citizen participation is undoubtedly one of the mosr bFortant factors determining the success of the Comprehensive Plan. An inic-qee citizenry that is willing to work to achieve the goals set forth in the Ccxerthensive Plan is a tremendous asset.

Successful citizen participation could be achieved t?-zsu$:h a public education program designed to inform the County residents of the va--icr;s efforts involved in the planning process. Experience has shown that such a 2:llzlic information program yields a valuable sounding board technique from which valiC s-xgestions and criticisms usually result. Thus, these suggestions can 3e inregrated into the future goals and plans of Limestone County.

The recommended Capital Improvements Program and Budcsz of Limestone County is a major step toward the implementation of the County's ;:lar.s f o r future development.

The Capital Improvements Program and Budget should prove LhneELcial to the County Commission in preparing the county's annual budget. A l < i o ~ q h Lie Capital Improvements Program covers a period of at least fifteen years ir. t h e 5 z x z e, and the Sudget six years, it must be kept flexible and reviewed and u-datee ex:? year to kees pace with changing conditions within the County. Capital improvezen:s irs major projects requiring the expenditure of public funds over and above ?r.zcal operating expenses for the purchase, construction, or replacement of the pkysiczl needs of the county on the basis of a system of priorities, The capital Ln_crovl-r,ents program is normally coordinated by a County Planning Commission with the coczsrzcicn of the operating departments for the purpose of 1) establishing a coordir.ate5 srogram for all county public construction projects, and 2) establishing a met?&

f c r review of a l l proposed projects to determine if the plans conform to the Ccmprr'ner.s:-:c-Dlan.

The budget and program presentation that follows is guided by the follow-ng policies.

157

P

1. Where p r o j e c t s a r e related t o each o t h e r i n f i n a l u s e, t h e i r construction d e s i r a b l y should be timed so as to be mutually b e n e f i c i a l.

2.

Buildings c o n s t r u c t i o n priorities should be e s t a b l i s h e d, t o t h e g r e a t e s t e x t e n t possible, on t h e basis of g r e a t e s t e x i s t i n g need.

3.

S i t e s f o r f u t u r e p r o j e c t s should be acquired i n advance of need while vacant land is s t i l l available.

4.

Public funds should be allocated on t h e basis of t h e o f f i c i a l c a p i t a l improvement program.

Many elements of t h e Comprehensive Plan cannot be implemented through t h e county's day-to-day administration.

t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of property and/or construction of p u b l i c works.

expenditures must be evaluated and considered i n t h e c o u n t y ' s annual budget.

or a l l proposed improvements should be e s t a b l i s h e d i n a long-range c a p i t a l improvement program.

These elements r e q u i r e d i r e c t a c t i o n by t h e county through Financing of c a p i t a l Expenditures ADVANTAGES O F C A P I T A L PROGRMMING Limestone County can derive considerable b e n e f i t s from a systematic approach t o planning c a p i t a l projects.

These b e n e f i t s are, however, dependent upon a strong l e g i s l a t i v e commitment t o t h e program and firm executive leadership i n carrying it o u t.

S o m e of t h e advantages of c a p i t a l programming are:

a.

b.

C.

d.

e.

Capital p r o j e c t s can be brought i n t o l i n e with county o b j e c t i v e s,

a n t i c i p a t e d growth, and f i n a n c i a l c a p a b i l i t i e s.

B y planning, p r o j e c t s ahead, those t h a t are needed or d e s i r e d t h e most w i l l be constructed first.

Advance programming of p u b l i c works on an o r d e r l y basis w i l l h e l p avoid t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of c o s t l y mistakes.

making sound annual budget decisions.

Local o f f i c i a l s w i l l be guided i n The c a p i t a l improvements program keeps t h e p u b l i c informed about f u t u r e c o n s t r u c t i o n p l a n s of t h e county.

A l s o, knowledge about t h e f u t u r e p h y s i c a l needs of t h e county and t h e f i n a n c i a l a b i l i t y of t h e local government to f u l f i l l t h e s e needs i s a valuable a i d to p r i v a t e i n v e s t o r s.

Coordination of capital improvements programming by t h e county agencies can reduce scheduling problems, c o n f l i c t i n g and overlapping pro,jects, and overemphasis of any government function.

C a p i t a l improvements programming o f f e r s p u b l i c o f f i c i a l s an opportunity t o p l a n the l o c a t i o n, timing, and f i n a n c i n g of needed improvements i n t h e i n t e r e s t of t h e e n t i r e county.

Furthermore, adequate planning a n d cooperation of various agencies a s s i s t i n reducing duplication a s w e l l a s c o s t of such c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s and avoid public inconveniences.

158

I

'I

-I L

f.

P r e p a r a t i o n of a c a p i t a l program improves t h e l o c a l government's change of o b t a i n i n g a v a i l a b l e Federal and State a i d f o r planning, c o n s t r u c t i o n and financing c a p i t a l improvements.

A N A L Y S I S I n comparison t o o t h e r TARCOG Region c o u n t i e s, Limestone County has a r e l a t i v e l y sound, s t a b l e f i n a n c i a l s t - c t u r e.

The county's revenues are obviously increasing, with e f f o r t s being made t o keep expenditures w i t h i n c o l l e c t e d revenues.

Ad valorem taxes are not exceedingly high, and t h e county's bonded indebtedness is n o t a t i t s l e g a l l i m i t.

I n terms of financing f u t u r e capital p r o j e c t s, t h e major dependence would seem t o rest on c u r r e n t revenue and revenue bonds.

I I

I R

I It is recognized t h a t limited f e d e r a l funds are a v a i l a b l e and ~y be u t i l i z e d for v a r i o u s projects, such as t h e a c q u i s i t i o n and development of r e c r e a t i o n areas.

It i s a l s o recognized t h a t t h e Alabama S t a t e Highway Department w i l l be res-wnsible f o r implementing p o r t i o n s of t h e Limestone County Transportation Plan.

Financial a s s i s t a n c e from such sources w a s n o t made a part of t h i s C a p i t a l Improvements Budget because of t h e unpredictable nature of funding by t h e agencies.

This does n o t imply t h a t such funds should be r e j e c t e d or n o t sought a f t e r, b u t r a t h e r t h a t t h e cagiital improvements l i s t e d i n t h i s budget are needed now; and emphasis h a s been placed on funds t h a t a r e a v a i l a b l e l o c a l l y ' o r can be obtained by a bond i s s u e.

Should f e d e r a l o r s t a t e a i d be o f f e r e d or agreed upon, then such funds should be used.

RECOMMEND A T I O N S

1. The county should a c t i v e l y s o l i c i t f e d e r a l and s t a t e g r a n t s.

Many f e d e r a l and state programs have been a v a i l a b l e or t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of c o m u i t y f a c i l i t i e s.

The Housing and Community Development A c t of 1974 provides funds or rnost community f a c i l i t i e s, except central a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f a c i l i t i e s.

I I

I I

2.

The county should s e r i o u s l y consider c r e a t i o n of a Rese-rve ?und earmarked for capital improvements.

3. The county should consider t h e organization of u t i l i t y s e r v i c e d i s t r i c t s i n order to f i n a n c e c e r t a i n s e r v i c e s of less than countywide scope, unless these s e r v i c e s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e t o a system t r u l y countywide i n scope (such a s w a t e r se-mice).

CAP IT AL 'IMP ROVE ME NTS

'BUD GET 1

The o b j e c t i v e of t h e C a p i t a l Improvements Budget is t o maintair. a proper balance between o p e r a t i o n and c a p i t a l expenditures i n r e l a t i o n t o revenues.

I n doing so, t h i s Budget should n o t be confused with t h e Annual Operating Budget. The -Annual Budget i s a program of f i n a n c i a l o b l i g a t i o n s f o r a one year p e r i o d, i n c l ~ c i n g a l l items t h a t are both r e c u r r i n q and nonrecurring needs r e g a r d l e s s of s i z e of expendit-xe. The C a p i t a l I

Improvement Budget itemizes only those i t e m s a n t i c i p a t e d a s c a p i t a l o u t l a y s during t h e next six y e a r s.

I t should be noted t h a t a l l c o s t s l i s t e d i n t h i s budget a r e estimates and intended t o be used as g u i d e l i n e s only.

The primary function of these e s t i m a t e s is to g i v e t h e governing body and Limestone County c i t i z e n s some general c o s t s i n o r d e r t h a t they might see how t h e s e w i l l a f f e c t t h e f u t u r e budgets of Limestone County.

159

Past annual financial statements for Limestone County have been analyzed to determine trends of revenues and operating expenditures. This effort was undertaken so that projections of financial statistics could be made and capital improvements could be scheduled in light of the countyls ability to pay. Table projected revenues and expenditures, 1983-1990, depicts past revenues and expenditures, fiscal years 1976-1982, and It shoul&be noted that despite the expected surplus shown in the table for the budget period, inflation will be expected to reduce the county's ability fo finance capital improvements without the availability of revenue bonding and federal aid.

Therefore, professional budgeting procedures, agressive use of available bonding options, and agressive use of federal domestic assistance programs should enable the county to implement its Capital Budget according to the Budget's recommended schedule.

Provided the county works diligently at increasing its revenue potential, the following projects should be funded.

hence, additional revenues will eventually accrue Limestone County.

These projects will promote economic development; The projects listed on the next page were drawn from the Community Facilities Plan.

TABLE VIII-1 LIMESTONE COUNTY REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PROJECTED SIX-YEAR BUDGET PERIOD (1983-1989)

(FIGURES IN MILLIONS)

Projection 1983-1984 1984-1985 1985-1986 1986-1987 1987-1988 1988-1989 5.65 6.50 7.50 8.50 10.00 5.00 6.00 7.80 8.00 9.00 Revenues 5.00 Expenditures 4.60 Excess (Deficit)

-40

.65

.50

.50 1.00 SOURCE: TARCOG TABLE VIII-2 LIMESTONE COUWY, COUKTY-YIOL TAX M R tlY MILLS BY FISCAL YEAR OF L M T W O R C H W E 1901-82 f

d

?

10.5 1 4. 5 2 1. 0 6. 5 6. 5 General 2. 5 2.5 2. 5 S t a t e 6. 5 Soldler School 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 2 4. 0 1 0. 0 1 6. 5 Cane r a I 7. 0 8. 5 5. 0 C o u n t y Road b Bridge Ilospital neappra I rn a 1 School (County)

School fOrmt. I 1. 5 1.0 2. 0 5. 5 1.0 4. 5 1.5 2.0 6. 5 1.0 2. 5 2. 0 0

4. 0 1. 0 SOUHCE:

S t a t e of Alabama. Department of Examiners of Public Accounts.

1 9 7 1 - 1 9 A l 160

Funding Source COST P r o j e c t Department F e d e r a l Local Federal/Local F i s c a l Year 1 P o l i c e C a r S h e r i f f 900 CB 1983-1984 1 Pumper F i r e Note: FmHA Loan 80,000 RDA/GA 1983-1984 1 F i r e S t a t i o n F i r e Note: FmHA Loan 147,500 RDA/GO 1983-1984 1983-1984 School Renovations Education N/A N/A DE/ARC/GO 1983-1984 E a s t and South Water

$260, 700

$158, 000 RDA/LN/REV 1983-1984 Equipment Purchase Engineering N/A N/A RDA/GO Limestone Systems CDBG CB 1985-1986 1985-1986 1 Pumper F i r e Note: FmHA Loan 80,000 RDA/GO 1985-1986 1 F i r e S t a t i o n F i r e Note: FmHA Loan 147,500 RDA/GO Equipment Purchase Engineering N/A N/A RDA/GO 1985-1986 School Renovations Education N/A N/A DE/ARC/GO 1985-1986 1

B e l l e Mina System Water

$ 504,000

$ 12,600 RDA/ARD/GO 1985-1986 RDA/CDBG/GO 1985-1986 Lester-Salem System Water 350, 000 719, 300 RDA/CDBG/GO 1

1985-1986 South Limestone System Water 80, 000 20, 000 RDA/CDBG/GO 1985-1986 NPS/ARC/GO 1985-1986 County Park R e c r e a t i o n 252,800 63, 200 1 P o l i c e C a r S h e r i f f 9,000 2 P o l i c e C a r s S h e r i f f 1 Pumper F i r e 1 F i r e S t a t i o n F i r e Equipment Purchase Engineering School Renovations Education North T, j mestone System Water County Park Recreation

$ 18,000 CB 1987-1988 Note: FmHA Loan 80,000 RDA/GO 1987-1988 Note: FmHA Loan 147, 500 RDA/GO 1987-1988 N/A N/A RDA/GC) 1987-1988 N/A N/A DE/ARC/GO 1987-1988

$ 243,200

$ 60,800 RDA/ARC/REV 1987-1988 NPS /RDA/ARC/GO 1987-1988 63, 200 2 5 2, 8 0 0 CB - County Budget GO - General O b l i g a t i o n Bonds REV - Revenue Bonds DOT - U. S.

Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n HUD - U.S. Department of Housing 6; Urban Development RDA - Rural Development A c t EPA - Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency EDA - Economic Development Agency ARC - Appalachian Regional Commission DON - Donation CDBG - Community Development Block Grant Program NPS - N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e LN - Local Bank Loan (Community F a c i l i t i e s )

DE - Department of Education

TABLE V I I I - 3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Project COST Funding Source Federal Local Federal/Local Fiscal Y e a r 1 Police C a r 1 Pumper 1 F i r e S t a t i o n E q u i p m e n t P u r c h a s e School R e n o v a t i o n South L i m e s t o n e System B e l l e Mina S y s t e m C o u n t y Park Sher i f F i r e Fire E n g i n e e r i n g Education Water Water R e c r e a t i o n 9,000 N o t e : FmHA Loan 180,000 N o t e : FmHA Loan 147,500 N/A N/A N/A N/A

$ 120,000

$ 30,000 128,000 32,000 252,800 63,200 CB RDA/GO RDA /GO DE/ARC/GO RDA/GO RDA/CDBG/REV RDA/CDBG/REV NPS/RDA/GO 1989-1990 1989-1990 1989-1990 1989-1990 1

1989-1990 1989-1990 1

1989-1990 1989-1990 1 Police C a r 1 P u m p e r 1 F i r e S t a t i o n Equipment Purchase School R e n o v a t i o n s E a s t L i m e s t o n e System Tanner System C o u n t y Park Sheriff Fire F i r e Engineering Education Water Water R e c r e a t i o n N o t e : FmHA N o t e : FmHA N/A N/A 64,800 252,000 122,000 9,000 Loan 180,000 Loan 147,500 N/A N/A

$ 16,200 18,000 63,200 LEAA/CB RDA/GO RDA/GO DE/ARC/GO RDA/ARC/REV RDA/ARC/REV RDA/GO NPS/RDA/ARC/GO 1991-1995 1991-1995 1991-1995 1991-1995 1991-1995 1991-1995 1991-1995 1991-1995 1 P u m p e r F i r e 1 F i r e S t a t i o n F i r e E q u i p m e n t Purchase Engineering School R e n o v a t i o n s Education R u r a l C o m m u n i t y Park R e c r e a t i o n N o t e : FmHA Loan

$180,000 RDA/GO 1995-2000 N o t e : FmHA Loan 147,500 RDA/GO 1995-2000 N/A N/A FDA/GO 1995-2000 N/A N/A DE/ARC/GO 1995-2000 60,000

$ 60,000 RDA/NPS/ARC/GO 1995-2000 Funding Source Abbreviations:

See page 16.0

TABLE VIII-4 LIMESTONE COUNTY, FINANCIAL

SUMMARY

OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT 1972-82 IN SELECTED FISCAL YEARS w 1,

i 1972-73 1974-75 1976-77 1978-79 1980-81

\\

f i \\

Revenues State 979,857 1, 285, 584 Federal 485, 776 584, 652 Local 1, 140, 316 1,527,482 Other 50, 777 217, 081 Total 2,656,726 3, 614, 799 Expenditures Expenditures Paid Warrants Paid Outstanding Indebtedness Assessed Property Valuation Regular Corporate Utilities Motor Vehicles Act 1000 Act 48 Constitutional Debt Limit*

Indebtedness Chargeable to Limit

'I Su r p 1 us " debt 2,177, 787 2,177, 787 60, 000 932, 587 38,475,820 24,815,900 3, 160, 630 4, 563, 380 5, 935, 910 1, 346, 653 295, 000 1, 05 l., 6 5 3 4,604,997 4, 560, 997 44, 000 1,419,266 44,391,230 25,943,710 3, 708, 800 5, 262, 380 7,801,740 1, 674, 600 1,553,693 252,000 1, 301,693 1,624,467 1, 852, 859 2,010,659 1,118,600 6,606,585 6,063, 273 5, 849, 725 213, 548

-. I _

2,304,000 50,556,900 28,317,540 4, 843, 540 5,646,860 9, 553,880 2, 195, 170 2, 527, 850 207, 000 2, 320, 850 I I-6,071, 204 7, 314, 370 5,635,395 7,311,244 5, 219, 814 5,534,795 7,261,244 4,988,109 100, 600 50,000 231,705

• \\\\5, 733, %1/.

- ~i

_c------ - - ~

3,539,000 4,470,753 1,725,648 I 78,941,747 84,832,160 57,168,987 57,854,120 53,307,240 5,074,840 4,559,120 2, 189, 170 6,339,740 5,046,120 5, 448, 480 8,537,980 15,467,420 10,674,100 1,820, 200 1,905,380 ' 4,801,180 1

3,947,087 4,241,608 3, 821, 009 480, 000 470, 000 420, 000 3,467,087 3,771,608 3,401,009

• Changed from 34% assessed value to 5% in 1976-77 SOURCE: State of Alabama, Department of Examiners of Public Accounts, 1974-1983

TABLE VIII-5 LIMESTONE COUNTY COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING J U L Y 1983 REVENUES Taxes Licenses & Permits Intergovernmental Charges For S e r v i c e s Misc. Revenue T o t a l Revenue EXPENDITURES General Govt.

Public S a f e t y Highways & Roads P

0 S a n i t a t i o n IP Health Welfare C u l t u r a l & R e c Education T o t a l Current Expenditure Capital Outlay (500)

Debt S e r v i c e - P r i n c i p a l Intergovernmental

- I n t e r e s t General S p e c i a l Capital D e b t T o t a l Fund Revenues P r o j e c t s S e r v i c e s 1,418, 634 513, 370 905, 264 82, 090 24, 797 57,293 2, 176, 284 378,323 1,681,447 99, 269 239,969 233,239 187,454 30,278 153,686 1, 566 4, 104,431 1,180,007 2,797,690 100, 835 785, 755 675, 798 1, 584, 948 3, 000 6 3 1, 029 668, 784 172,808 4 32 114,147 63,471 19,175 15, 709 3,414,100 1,412,823 59,469 33, 399 137, 481 2, 512 1, 584, 948 2, 000 172, 376 50, 676 3, 466 26,070 1, 979, 5 2 1 4, 502 4, 502 4 90 490 Trusts &

Agency 17,245 6, 732 1,434 25, 4 1 1 309, 444 43,826 63,733 200, 459 1 0 1, 733 26, 756 107, 682 2 1, 214 86, 468 101, 733 26, 756 1

17,245 1

17,245 1,426 Total Expenditures 3,959,715 1,477,863 2,129,730 204, 962 128,489 1 8, 6 7 1 I_-_

SOURCE:

Limestone County Commission, 1983

PRESENT 'REVENUE / E X PE ND I T U R E PATTERNS As a result of the combination of statewide property tax reappraisal and subsequent readjustment of county mileages, an interesting transition has taken place in the county's assessed property valuation (and the associated tax re-ceipts.) Total assessed valuation was just over $50.5 million ih 1976-77, and as a result of reappraisal activities, jumped $28.4 million (56.3 percent) by fiscal year 1978-79.

assessed valuation reveals that there was a $28.9 million (102 percent) change in the "regular" or ad valorem portion of the valuation and an actual increase of less than 10 percent in the combined corporate and utilities valuation. This was indicative of the fact that corporate and utility properties were already assessed in an accurate and up-to-date manner, and that it was private/personal property which was outdated and undervalued in its assessment (especially rural "farm land". )

However, an examination of the sub components of total Because of this transfer of almost 90 percent of the increased assessment/

reappraisal to the individual private taxpayers (and voters) there was a down-wards revision of the countywide proportion of the tax mileage in fiscal year 1978-79.

This reduction from 28 mills to 24 mills effected the general/ad valorem tax base by 1.5 mills (a reduction of almost 20 percent). The road and bridge fund tax base by 1 mill, or 22.2 percent; the hospital revenue base by.5 mills (14.3 percent) and the countywide school district millage by 1 mill or 15.4 per-cent (see tables VIII-3 -thru VII'I-5.

In other words, in FY 1978-79, the potential tax millage on the total assessed value of the county at $83.94 million at 28 mills was $2-,350,320; wnereas by 1981-82, with an assessed value of $76.42 million, and a 24 mill effective tax rate, only S1,834,080 of potential taxes was available--a decrease of $516,240 or about 22 percent. (not counting exempt properties or actual taxes)

It is little wonder then that when the decreasing property valuation and decreasing millage was combined with an overall economic slow-down with reduced sales tax receipts and some user fees, the county's total revenues fell from 7,314,370 in FY 1 9 8 1 to 5,733,361 in FY 1982.

Part of this reduction in funding can be observed in the fact that total state and local government employment re-duced from 2,590 in 1980 to 2,470

(-5 percent) in 1982.

In current (FY 1983) expenditure terms,* Limestone County spent as follows (by "function") :

General Government Public Safety Highway and Roads Sanitation Health Welfare Culture and Recreation Education Capital Outlay Debt Service 20.4%

17.5%

41.1%

.1%

4.5%

3.0%

.5%

1.5%

8.0%

3.3%

• Net of any intergovernmental transfers, excluding hospital and school system 165

c Unfortunately, the 1982 Census of Governments data is not available at the county or county-wide population grouping level at this time. However, it is felt from examination of current state and county data, that the 1977 Census relationships are probably fairly representative of existing conditions. In 1977, Limestone County had general revenues in excess of $99 per capita f r o m all sources. This figure exceeded both the state-wide total county average of

$95 and the Alabama county population size group (AWSG) figure of $76.

Obyiously, since the Alabama total county average, lagged the U. S. per capita general revenue total. County average figure by almost $125 (132 percent) Limestone County fared little better on a national comparison for per capita revenue with either counties of population size 25,000-50,000.

For this reason, most of the comparisons made in this section will be to relative state averages, and not national averages.

Tables VIII-6 thru VIII-14 compare the 1972-77 revenues and expenditures on a per capita basis for Limestone County, Alabama, and the USA. The following, still existant, trends and observations can be made from this data:

Per Capita Taxes 1977 per capita taxes of $35.65 were 88 percent of the state wide average and about 2 1 percent above the average for all Alabama counties of po2ula-tion 25,000-50,000.

From 1972-1977, however, per capita taxes in Limestone County grew by only 25.7 percent, which was significantly below both the state rates of 53.1 per-cent total counties and 45.0 percent for counties of population size 25,000-50, 000.

Also, in 1977, the per capita property tax in Limestone County was sivificantly below both state relative averages, while the per capita sales was over 13 percent above the state-wide average, double the Alabama 25,000-50,009

-wpu-lation county group figure and even twice both the U.S. all county average and the U.S. all 25,000-50,000 population county group figure ($7.37).

This points out, that, while per capita incomes are rising in Limeszone County, they are still significantly below both state and national averages and the reliance on regressively characterized sales taxes for the major po-ion of tax revenues rather than property and use taxes (or user related fees) Is dmqer-ous both in terms of slowing economic growth and reducing county revenue Curing economically recessive times.

Per Capita Education Expenditures The 1977 per capita expenditure of $12.77 was over twice the state-wide all county average, and three times the Alabama 25,000-50,000 populaticn county group. This figure was, however as would be expected, significantly below the national figure of around 40, where property taxes are keyed to educa-tion spending.

166

I I

TABLE VIII-6 LIMESTONE COUNTY, FINANCIAL STATISTICS BY UNITS OF GOVERNMENT, 1977 (FIGURES ALL IN $1,000'~)

ncvcrw GfNfRAL

REVENUE, C X C L @ I

• 4 INTLRLOCAL, TOTAL sTArf aovEnwfNr ORY.......

GENERAL R t V f H U L FROM OWM S m C c S...

P n o P c n T v.............

oTncn..............

CHARGES AN0 MISCELLANEOUS.....

arum..............

U T I L I T Y REVENUE............

o r w n................

I N T E ~ G ~ V ~ R h l i N i A L R L V E M e..,..

T A X E S...............

CURRENT CHARSfS.........

WATER SUPPLY.............

L V E N O I TURC O l R L C T GENERAL l P f N O I T U n c.......

C A P I T A L OUTLAY............

FOUCATION s m i c u i COUCAT.ION.............

S A L A R I E S AN0 RAGES........

L I B R A R Y..............

S O C I A L S E R V I C E S AN0 INCOME HAIMTCNAWCE P U B L I C WELFARE...........

H O S P I T A L..............

HtLALTM..............

1 R A N S P O R T A T l O N I MlGHWAY..............

C A P I T A L OUTLAV..........

I u1 PUBLIC S A F E T V I P O L I C E P R O T E C T I O N.........

F I R E P R O T E C T I O N..........

P R O T E C T I V E I N S P E C l l O N AN0 R f L u L A T l O M C o n n E c T l o n.............

scnfnAGL..............

C A P I T A L OUTLAY..........

SANITATION OTNCR TNAN SEWERAGE...

PARKS AND nEcncATioN........

HOUSING AN0 URBAN REUEWAL.....

FINANCIAL

• n-iuis.rmAriom......

GENERAL P U B L I C d U I L O l N C S......

I N T E M S T ON GENERAL DEBT......

0Tuc.q ANO UNALLOCA~LC........

.ATER SUPPLY.............

OTHER................

ENVIRONNENT AN0 H O U S l N b l GOVERNMENTAL A O M I N l S T R A T I O N I GE ME RAL CONTROL..........

' I L I T T L X P f N O l T U R E..........

D E B 1 OERr OUTSTANOINGv T O T A L........

LONG-TERM..............

L O C A L SCNOOLS............

U T I L I T I S..............

orncn................

?.'.I 4 104 1 401 1 ¶b1 I 1*J 1 314 411 1 017 J4*

b4 a15 11*

4 4 1

• 1 101 I

• LO r*

I b14 I l l 111 J

b4 I

• I 2 1 b24 J I

¶ 7*

181 J55 11 27 1 O¶O 1 050 1 101 1 J4*

I ¶O*

140 7

l". 1.1 I..,l<ll -

1 711 I*¶

¶ 1 ¶¶b I

¶ ¶

• I

¶ ¶

• J 011 11 2 *11 11 4

l a 1 1 8 1 111 -

SOURCE:

U.S.

Census of Governments, 1977 167

TABLE V I I I - 7 PER CAPITA GOVERNMENT COUNTY REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES (ALL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT INCLUDED)

BY S I Z E OF COUNTY, 1977 United States A l a b a m a Z o u n t i e s C o u n t i e s A l l W/ POP.

A l l w/ pop.

C o u n t i e s 1 0, o O O -

C o u n t i e c 1 0, O O O -

A v e r a g e 50,000 A v e r a g e 5 O r O O O G l N C I A L I C v c M H, C a c L W l N C IMILRLOCAL........

t.*O.23 bO5.1.

517.b-

.5..vv iuicncovcny(Icmiu I L V C M.............

mo. > I m. b i a

• a.

• i l.b.4b C I O H FCOCIAL COvCINNCNl.............

17.b*

4 1. *

• 9b.Bb 1V.VI 6CNLIIA.L ICVCNUC INARIMG............

1O.b) 1r.14 I1.bO 15.31 FROM I l A l C bOvCnHNiNl..............

?Ol.MM 1-*.*1 181.05 llb.3¶ P I O M LOCAL I W I C C S.................

• l*. *a J I 3. 1 5 212.73 101.51 r n o m i r.

iai.11 174.73 53.00 11.01 o w c n be.*-

1 5. 5 5

71. b*

.I.lV D I ICc 1 GC NCI AL I ar"O I 1unc

( 0 1.lo bOO.15 511.0.

• • ..I5 OIHCR.....................

b**.Ob 51b.Jl

.. #.

• I

.0...11 SALAIICS A N 0 8 b G C I.

131.00 1*1..0 l19.5b 1.3.3.

P M L l C M L F b l C 55.71 17.bZ 2. J 5

..l H O W l l b C.....................

• I.@*

45.1.

l5.1*

b 5. 0 5 S A L A I I C J A H 0 8 A C I J...............

21.13 2l.b*

15. b7 1J.01 YCfiLlH......................

1J.bb b. b l b.5b 1.1" Ol"m......................

. 0 4 HICNWAY.....................

43.10 54.0.

lV.15

• >. a 1 CArllAL W T L A V.................

1 4. 1 4 I *. J b 1 0. 1 6 7.19 Oil"......................

• .I1 2.JV q.7J

. " a i

T A ~ C I 15l.l?

lOO.l*

110. b*

)*.I9 CHAlGCS ;rd kliCiLiAk&l; : : : : : : :

1 1 1. 4 1 111.b) 151.0.

I ) -. ) )

CArlIAL W I L A V.

103.1*

1 4. 5 @

70.l*

1V.bI CDUCLl ION SlIVICC I I

[DUCAT ION j ¶ ¶. l

• 319.55 1 1 1. q 7 225.bb L I U R A R Y 5.55 1. 5 0 1.57

.be socibL srmiiici ;NO iNio;c'miIiriuLic; CASH A S S I S I ~ ; ~ ~

id ;cioL'r;rwcNrs Jl.17 b. 5 1

.oa

.OJ

~ ~ A H I ~ O R l A l I O H I PUBLIC S A F C T Y I POLlCC ?IOlCCTIOH................

• l.b5 Z0.V) 2 U. b.

Il..b I A L A I I C I AN0 W A G I S.

12.07 111.11 1 0. 0 1 1 1. b )

r i n c rnorccriom 20.11 0.Ib 11.1b U. b l COIRCC 1 I.....................

7.51 1.75 2. b )

1.Ul

?ROTccTIV(

IMIP[CIION A N 0 I(GvCbII0N.

2.17

.bO I.50

.I8 CArlTAL WTLAr.

11.11 l0.7*

17.11 3. 1 )

SAHlllllON 01HCI I N A N I C l C I A G C..........

11.16 5.61

• . J

• b.b1 NAlUnAL I C 3 W I C C I................

4.5J 5.07

• 71 1.21 P A m

• I AN0 fiCClCAllON................

lb.2b b.bJ 1 3. b I

.. I 0 tNVIRONHCN1 bNO Hou3lNll S r.CmAGC.

91.97 lb.71 2J.va 9. 1 4 MOUSING A M ) UllBAN ICHCWAL............

15.06 4.37 I t. * )

7. 2 0 1.1-

• . > b

~ I N A N C I A L bOHlNlIlIAllON.

l0.b) 0. b O 5.7b

5. 0*

). b L GCYCnAL rUBLlC I)U1LOING¶.

~ O V C I N M C H I A L A O M I H l I ~ l A l I O

• I GCNCRAL COMTROL.................

11.11 15.13 11.11 10.71 1V.qb l b. 3 5 2 1. 9 J Ib. > O Y *. b >

1>.61 15.1J 17.b.

• • .I1

• l.lb L O. 5 1 71.bl

• • .5*

L 5. 1 1 o i w n W A C L O C A B L C ulILITr CarcuoiTvmc'.

• 7.34 r A Y N C N I 1 10 ¶ l A T C 6 O V C I U C H l.............

1.**

1.11

. b

• I.lV O t N C I A L O C l T W l ¶ l A N O l

• E...............

bll.J*

174.09 511.7*

1br.I)

LOCAL ¶ C I ( o o C ¶..................

I59.Ib I.5.7b bl.*b q o. 0 5 O l H C n......................

417.11 116.11

.)I.*)

11o.ao CbIH AN0 SCCUIIIY HOLOINC¶~ 101AL..........

..5.60 1>*.7b 15J.Jv 117.01 b*"

I 1 N l C I C ) l ON OCMCIAL O C 8 1.

uriLirv n c v c w *.

bb.5.

LONG-1 CRN 57b.2b 3b0.5b 4 1 1. b 4 J5O.Lb NOTE:

Figures reflect a l l combined g o v e r n m e n t a l u n i t s, C O u n t Y f municipal, and districts.

SOURCE:

U. S.

C e n s u s of G o v e r n m e n t s, 1977.

168

TABLE V I I I - 8 R E V E W E,

E X C L u O I N I INTCRLOCAL, TOTAL.....

....... R E V E W ONLV............

I I

I I

1 1

1 I

8 1

I I

I I

b"", *.. 0. P l l.

16.........

19 061......

n c v E I w I E FROPI OWN swncci 16 J W

~IJ.)S GCNERAL REVENUE FROM O W S W R C C S T A X E l P n o P E i i ;

S A L E 1 A N 0 011051 R i C i I i T i :

1 0-4

• '?.IV INCOHE....................

OTHER....

CHARGES A N 0 U l S ~ f ; L k O U S............

I CURRENT CHARGES................

OTHER.

UTILITY n E v E w E.

WATER SUPPLY....

I L I O u O H o i w ;T;Ri,.Ri"i&E:

EHPLOYEE n E i i n E w i n c v i m u c...........,

v 8

• a 1

-I EXPENDITURE.

TOTAL.............

I C A P I T A L OUTLAY...............

EouCATI;N.~~n;I;Eil.

o i w n HOSP I T A L I S A L A R I E i ;HI)

WA6ES.............

H E A L T H....................

HIGHVAY....................

C A P I T A L OUTLAY...............

A I R P O R T S P A R K I N G F k i L i T i E i.............

WATER TRANSPORT A M 0 T E R M I N A L l.........

P O L I C E PROTECTION...............

S A L A I I E S AN0 WACCI.............

F I R E PROTECTION................

S A L A R I E S AND WAGES.............

TRINSP(rRTATIOH1 P U B L I C SAFETY#

aim.....................

ENVIRONMENT AN0 H W S l N O l SEVERAGE,

S A N I T A T I O N OTHER f H h ' s i & R %

PARKS AN0 RECRCATIOU.....

CAPITAL O i J T i A i ' * ' ' ' '

H O U l I N 6 AN0 URmN RENEWAL...

GENERAL CONTROL........

GENERAL P U B L I C B U l L O l N C S...

I N T E R E l T ON O E Y R A L DEDT....

OTHER A N 0 UNALLOCA8LC......

C A P I T A L OUTLAY...............

F I N A N C I A L AOHlNlSTRATIoW...........

GOVERMHENTAL A O H I N I S T R A T I O U (

U T I L I T V E a P E N O I T U n L................

l A T E R S U P r L V..................

OTHER......................

L l O U O R STORES EXPEHOITURC.............

EMPLOYEE RCTlREMCNT CXPLIUIITURC..........

LoHG-TcRm........

F A I T H AHO cncoIr.

SHORT TEnM.......

L o m G - T E n u DEBT B Y cunrosc L O C A L SCHOOLS.....

U T I L I l I E S.......

NONGUARAHTCEO...................

I..............

LO O u d '

b JOT1 2')

I 8Ib I 62q 2 b0 1 2 1 87 220 v 333 I 17r 7 781 16 J87 l b 019 11 J32 J J 8 I

232.00 I U 3. b Z

. 3 8

• I.,?]

J7.50 2. 9 1 1.01 6.00 2. 4 0 8. 0 4 8.b8 b.10 5.08 220.62

• O.V6 179.b6 J 7 8. J 7 O T H E R.......................

2

• 8 7 LONG-TERN DEBT ISSUEO................

I 111 LONG-TERM DEBT RETIRE0 (15 CHANGE IN DEBT O U R l W I Y i A i :

I 7 2 CASH A M 0 SECURIlV N O C O I N C I ~ T O l A L.......

1 CHPLOYEE nEiinEwEnr.

OTHER.......................

CASH AN0 OEPOSlTS................

x c u n i i i E s FEOERAL.

SOURCE:

U.S. Census of Governments, 1977.

1 6 Y

LIMESTONE COUNTY COUNTY-WIDE UNIT OF GOVERNMENT, REVENUES AN0 EXPENDITURES FUR 1977 rntal D o l l a r s P e r

($1,0OOs Capita P o p u l a t i o n, 1975 ( e s t i m a t e d )...............

43,310 D a t e of End of F i s c a l Year 9/30 G e n e r a l Revenue.....................

4,305 99.40 I n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l Revenue...............

2,412 55.69 T a x e s.........................

1,544 35.65 P r o p e r t y.......................

447 10.32 S a l e s........................

892 20.60 Income........................

C h a r g e s a n d M i s c e l l a n e o u s...............

349 8.06 G e n e r a l E x p e n d i t u r e, A 1 1 F u n c t i o n s............

4.972 114.80 C a p i t a l O u t l a y....................

2,101 48.51 O t h e r........................

2,871 66.29 E d u c a t i o n......................

553 12.77 E d u c a t i o n S e r v i c e s S a l a r i e s a n d Wages.................

L i b r a r y.......................

19

.44 S o c i a l S e r v i c e s a n d Income M a i n t e n a n c e P u b l i c W e l f a r e....................

10

.23 C a s h A s s i s t a n c e P a y m e n t s Hospital.......................

S a l a r i e s a n d Wages.................

H e a l t h 89 2.05 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Highway.......................

1,644 37.96 C a p i t a l O u t l a y...................

222 5.13 O t h e r........................

P u b l i c S p f e t y P o l i c e P r o t e c t i o n...................

212 4.04 C o r r e c t i o n.......................

64 1.48 3

O t h e r..........................

.07 S e w e r a g e........................

1,682 38.83 C a p i t a l O u t l a y....................

1,624 37.50 N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s 4

.09 P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n..................

5

. 1 2 O t h e r.........................

5 1

.72 F i n a n c i a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n................

76 1.75 Salaries and Wages..................

66 1.52 G e n e r a l C o n t r o l....................

181 4.18 G e n e r a l Public B u i l d i n g s 355 8.20 I n t e r e s t o n G e n e r a l D e b t.................

21

. 4 8 O t h e r a n d U n a l l o c a b l e 23

.53 T o t a l Debt O u t s t a n d i n g A t End of F i s c a l Year 2,409 55.62 E x h i b i t S a l a r i e s a n d Wages C o u n t y o n l y - I n c l u d e s n o m u n i c i p a l i t i e s SOURCE:

U.S. C e n s u s o f Government 1977.

S a l a r i e s and Wages..................

136 3.14 E n v i r o n m e n t a n d H o u s i n g G o v e r n m e n t a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 1,043 24.m 170 I

I 1

I I

I I

1 I

I I

1 I

1 I

1 I

I I

TABLE V I I I - 1 0 P E R CAPITA REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR ALABAMA AND U. S.

COUNTIES, 1977 mow ITATE aovcnmcnr............

TAXCI rR&iTi IUI...............,-...

IWCW..

wnwi AMO rcistciuMwr..........

LWCATIOM.............

I M A ~ I E S id iAki............

cienuv P U L I C ILLFAR$...............

WOUITAL. !"...,..............

s o c ~ k s c i v i c g s ' ~ i o - t k % t i ~ i ~ i ~ i ~ k i I

TwuonTirioir.

WCICTH M I W A V...................

Mclc o w n r a m MOTECTIOM..............

cmnEcT low.................

cml~.EiT.Ak.,"~li';

o w n SCCILIIAY

1. ATV(IAL RiS%CiS:

rmxs AHO n E c n E A i i 4............

I 1

I I

I I

I I

I 1

1 I

I 1

I I

I I

I 171 I

NOTE:

C o u n t y - w i d e g o v e r n m e n t only, includes no municipalities SOURCE:

U.S.

C e n s u s of G o v e r n m e n t s, 1977.

TABLE VIII-11 LIMESTONE COUNTY, COUNTY-WIDE UNIT OF GOVERNMENT*, REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES

SUMMARY

, 1972 Total Per in $1,000'~ Capita Population, 1970

, Date of End of Fiscal Year General Revenue Intergovernmental Revenue Tax Revenue Charges and Miscellaneous General Expenditures, All Functions Capital Outlay Other Capital Outlay Other Education 4 1,

699 9/30 2,363 9 39 1,182 242 2, 549 1 7 1 2, 378 475 475 Highways Public Welfare Hospitals Health Police Protection Parks and Recreation Natural Re sources Correction Financial Administration General Control General Public Buildings Interest on General Debt Other and Unallocable Exhibit: County Contributions 1,420 39 22 15 9 1 1

40 47 35 1 6 1 38 34 1 3 1 to Own Retirement Systems 56.67 22.52 28.35 5.80 61.13 4.10 57.03 11.39 11.39 34.05

- 9 4

.53

.36 2.18

.02

.96 1.13

- 8 4

- 9 1 3.14 3.86

. a2 19.71 Total Debt Outstanding at End of Fiscal Year 822

• County only, includes no municipalities

~~

~~~

SOURCE: U.S. Census of Governments, 1972.

172 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 I

1 I

I I

I TABLE VIII-12 1,

I.

STATE OF ALABAMA,

SUMMARY

OF COUNTY-WIDE GOVERNMENT FINANCES, 1972 ICMRAL RfbC\\UL...................

l M l l ~ 6 O v E ~ l : H f ~ T A L R V N (.............

111 n E v I *. u r....................

clcorrntr TAICI omv..............

CWARCCS Ah0 H I S C C L L A M W S.............

CLhCaAL C L m f W I T W I # ALL ~ W U ? I O M s.. s..

I CLPllAL WTLAT.................

01W.r......................

COUCAllO*.....................

CAPllbL OUTLAT.................

OTHER......................

M I P l q A V S.....................

?U(rLIC ILLrbRC..................

MOSPIILLS.....................

HLbLlH

?ARKS Ah0 g L C I C A l l O H...............

NAIURAL ~ E S O U R C L S.................

C O r h C C T I O h....................

F l N b N C l b L A O

• l N I S T R A T 1 O M.............

CCLERlL COYTROL..................

CELLRAL r U 4 L l C 8 U I L O I N G S.............

IWTCRCSTcO* 6fhL*AL O f 0 1.............

O T M U.... W A L L O C A I L I...............

POLICC i

• i l i C T l O M.................

units 25, 000-Amount (1,000s)

I81 e4fi 11 110 b1 11 11 515 It I O I 11 (07 I 331 4 0 4 b11 t t I 9 111 4 1 1 2 016 121 11s I 1 41b TOTAL OERT O:ITLlAH9l)rO AT L I P OC F I S C A L TCAR Per Capita GfhLqAL f l ? L O I T U R C,

ALL F i ~ w c r l O m s.........

C A P I T b L OUTLAT.................

ormcn......................

coucArIo~.....................

OTHER......................

HlGMmITS.....................

P U O L l C r c L C L n f..................

HOSPllAL5.....................

n E b L r m......................

POCICC PlOlECT lo\\,................

PARKS AkO ~ E C R E A T l O I l...............

C O n r l ~ C l I C h....................

F l N b N C I A L ~ O M I N l S T l b T l O Y.............

ccucnu. ct*inoL..................

CLHfRbL F U d L l C ~ l l I L 0 1 W G S.............

INlCRLIl L\\ GLUERAL OCBT.............

01MfR b Y j U h b L L O C A l L ~...............

C A P I T A L J U T L A 1.................

HATURAL @CSOURCfS.................

41.51 Jl.35 5.10 TOTAL OCBT OulSTaMnlW A1 CW OC F I S C A L TCAR 11.M

[

a NOTE: County units only, no municipalities included SOURCE: U.S. Census of Governments, 1972.

1 7 3

TABLE VIII-13 General Revenue Taxes P r o p e r t y S a l e s Charges & M i s c.

PER CAPITA COUNTY-WIDE UNIT OF GOVERNMENTS 3EVENUE EXPENDITUW COMPARISON, LIMESTONE, ALABAMA AND U.S.A.

1972 and 1977 Same Size County Limestone Alabama Alabama

~~

1977 1972 1977 99.40 56.67

. 95.07 35.65 28.35 40.47 10.32 NA 18.63 20.60 NA 18.22 8.06 5.80 13.73 Capital Outlay 48.51 4.10 18.35 Education Pub1 i c W e 1 fa re H e a l t h Highways P

C a p i t a l

,P P u b l i c S a f e t y 4

Sewerage Government Admin.

I n t e r e s t on Gen. D e b t T o t a l D e b t Outstanding Capital 12.77

.23 2.05 37.96 5.13 6.44 38.83 37.50 14.13

.48 55.62 11.39

-94

-36 34.05 NA 3.31 NA NA 5.61

.82 19.71 5.23 2.19 5.69 24.55

-NA-7.92 7.71 NA 14.52 2.16 41.01 Note: "Same s i z e c o u n t i e s "

1 5 c o u n t i e s w i t h p o p u l a t i o n of 1972 52.96 26.97 13.28 NA 7.12 10.53 3.90 1.36 3.18 17.42 3.08 NA NA 6.95 1. 6 7 35.16

-NA-

,000 1977 75.91 29.36 15.40 10.18 8.86 8.09 7.29

.39 1.94 24.55 6.09 2.12 NA 10.61

.88 20.21

-NA-1972 44.50 20.25 10.72 NA 2.52 4.23 5.70

- 9 0

.98 18.99

-NA-2.86 NA NA 5.97

.69 18.35 USA 1977 A1 1 Same Size Counties Counties 184.96 219.94 84.57 58.64 68.85 47.29 10.40 7.37 36.21 40.41 26.63 25.48 34.69 41.25 10.27 20.35

-NA-19.12 5.19 NA 24.31 5.30 19.43 43.31 19.85 7.20 30.23

-NA-12.33 1.72 NA 19.48 4.49 96.55 SOURCE:

Derived from Census of Governments 1972-1977

- = m = - m = - - = = m ' = = - = I

TABLE V I I I - 1 4 I

li I

1 1

1 1

1 I

I I

PER CAPITA REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES, COUNTY-WIDE UNITS OF GOVERNMENT, PERCENTAGE CHANGE 1972-77 FOR SELECTED AREAS, LIMESTONE COUNTY AND ALABAMA Limes tone county A l a b a m a C o u n t i e s C o u n t i e s All Same Size

, G e n e r a l R e v e n u e Taxes Property Sales C h a r g e s & M i s c.

capital O u t l a y E d u c a t i o n P u b l i c Welfare H e a l t h H i g h w a y s C a p i t a l P u b l i c Safety S e w e r a g e C a p i t a l G o v e r n m e n t Admin.

Interest on G e n. D e b t Total D e b t O u t s t a n d i n g 75.4 25.7 39.0 NR 12.1

-75.5 469.4 11.5 94.6 151.9

-41.5 182.2 79.5 50.1 97.8 74.3 34.1 61.0 78.9 40.9 149.1 108.3 29.3 16.6 70.6 45.0 251.6 91.3 27.9 98.0 29.3

-56.7 112.9 77.7 27.5 10.1 NOTE:

S a m e size counties are those of population 25,000-50,000 SOURCE:

D e r i v e d f r o m U.S.

C e n s u s of G o v e r n m e n t s, 1972-1977 175

Due to this high level of relative spending, the change in spending 1977-77 only increased by 12.1 percent in Limestone County, compared with the relative state-wide figures of 34.1 (total) and 27.9 percent (25,000-50,000 counties).

This is indicative of the fact that once an education system reaches a certain size range, minimum program standards and transportation and fa-cility costs combine to create a total cost which rapidly becomes less and less independent on total pupil/population size. In this area, the county needs to seek aid through the state legislature in increasing mini-mum program supports on a general system size and program approach, rather than just a per pupil cost allocation. In addition, any additional pooling and combining of efforts with the city school system should be explored thoroughly. Program standards and transportation and facility costs combine to create a total cost which rapidly becomes less and less independent on total pupil/population size. In this area, the county needs to seek aid through the state legislature in increasing minimum program supports on a general system size and program approach, rather than just a per pupil cost allocation. In addition, any additional pooling and combining of efforts with the city school system should be explored thoroughly.

Per Capita Highway/Road Expenditures 1977 per capita highway expenditure by Limestone County was almost $38.

This figure was over 50 percent above the state-wide average (and same size county average) of $24.55.

In addition, this figure was also almost twice the USA all county average from the same period. This is especially significant when one notes that only 13.5 percent of that amount was ex-pended on capital outlay, meaning that 86.5 percent of the money was pri-marily spent ori just routine maintenance and repair.

As with education, due to the high per capita base operating expenditure, the change in expenditure from 1972-77 was significantly below the state-wide averages of 30-41 percent.

It should be pointed out that Limestone County has a proportionally large network of roads to maintain for a rural county. A l s o, despite the fact that gasoline tax revenues are earmarked to the highway function, Limestone County's work commuting patterns are such that the purchase of a significant amount of gasoline (and tax paid) outside the county is assured. Therefore, despite the job creation factor involved in the county highway maintenance, serious consid-eration should be given to shifting all or a significant portion of the respon-sibility to the state (ie... in the 1983 actual current/operating expenditures sector, 46.4 percent of all monies went for "highways and roads")

Per Capita Government Administration Expenditures 1977 per capita "cost of government" expenditures in Limestone County were

$14.13, which was favorably comparable with the Alabama countywide average of $14.52, and significantly below the national average for counties with population of 25,000-50,000 of 19.48.

From 1972-77, government per capita administrative expenditures rose by almost 152 percent in Limestone County, significantly above the Alabama total and "same size" county indexes of 108 percent and 78 percent res-176

I I

I 1

1 I

I I

I I

1 I

I 8

I I

1 I

I pectively. However, much of this increased rate of expenditure can be traced to the implementation of modern governmental procedures and in-creases in employment necessary to gear up to provide public services for the population growth associated with the manufacturing boom in this period.

In general, thexounty Commission has done an admirable job of balancing costs and services of government administration over the last decade. While some progress has been slow, the county has not over extended itself on a basis of sudden economic peakings as evidenced by the minimal levels of cutbacks re-quired during the past two years economic slowdown.

Per Capita Debt Expenditures In terms of total 1977 per capita debt, Limestone County significantly out-stripped both state-wide comparison bases. This was primarily due to county-wide water and sewer related projects.

The size of the per capita debt increase from 1972-77 can be reduced to a very reasonable level when a balance is struck between the earmarked/

revenue incurred debt and the general obligation debt. For the most part, Limestone County's debts are related to activities such as water and sewer and health/hospital services where the projects are self amortizing. In FY 1981-82, for instance while the county listed almost 4. 5 million in out-standing indebtedness, less than $.5 million was chargeable to the county's "full faith and credit" constitutional debt limit of almost $ 3. 8 million dollars.

The county's debt picture is sound and well grounded in "pay as you go" pro-ject orientation. This policy has helped somewhat to control growth in the county into the Athens-Decatur and Athens-Huntsville corridors through water system expansions based upon economically feasible (self supporting) population concentrations rather than just general geographical growth.

SOURCES OF AVAILABLE REVENUE I. Motor Vehicle Tax Revenues With the exception of raising the property tax on the automobile, no additional tax of this nature is practical in Limestone County since, first, the County Commuter patterns have made private transportation a necessity, and second, municipal taxes of this type are already rising as a r.ationa1 trend.

11. Gasoline Tax Revenue Limestone County levies the full Alabama authorized gasoline tax to cover the operation of the county road system and associated functions of regulation by the Sheriff's Department. This present trends in gasoline prices and the recut increase of the Federal gas tax make any increase in this tax (requiring local legislation) unfeasible.

177

111.

Cigarette and Tobacco Tax Revenues The c i g a r e t t e and tobacco products tax is currently not levied by Limestone County.

State-wide, twelve counties do u t i l i z e t h i s form of revenue production and i n 1979-1980, it produced an estimated 1 2 million d o l l a r s a t the county level.

Jackson County, similar t o Limestone County i n socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s, received a y i e l d of a1mos.t $50,000 i n 1982 through use of a county two cents ( 2 C ) per pack tax. The unpopular general nature of such a tax could be o f f s e t i n the county by earmarking t h e tax for a primary local program such as health o r eduction.

Such a tax should produce some additional revenue.

IV.

ABC Revenues The revenues from the S t a t e ABC Board, while of a s e n s i t i v e nature, and primarily a local discretionary matter, a r e worthy of note a t t h i s point.

From a purely revenue standpoint, a highly p o t e n t i a l source of revenue is being l o s t and a present source of revenue may be reduced.

Limestone County i s presently a dry county, bordered by two w e t areas, Madison County, Alabama, and Tennessee.

Sales revenues (especially f o r beer and wine) a r e being l o s t t o these neighboring regions.

A l s o,

i n FY 1981-82, Limestone County received less than 5 percent of the t o t a l general fund revenues, from ABC taxes.

The S t a t e Legislature i s s t i l l holding (and expected t o pass i f new debate cloture r u l e s go i n t o e f f e c t ) a b i l l t o remove a l l revenues from the sale of beer and alcoholic beverages from dry counties.

Realizing t h a t t h i s is a local decision, t h i s plan does not make a recommendation i n t h i s regard, it only points o u t the f a c t t h a t d e f i n i t e revenue p o t e n t i a l does e x i s t i n t h e local sale of beverages, and a future revenue loss t o Limestone and other dry counties is a r e a l probability.

Proposed plans a t the state and l o c a l l e v e l s t o earmark substantial portions of such a tax t o education ( i. e. 3 C on a can of beer) might provide a v a l i d j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h i s type of revenue i n counties such as Limestone.

V.

U s e r Charges and Gross Earning Revenues Madison and Morgan Counties levy usage-based charges f o r services such as garbage removal and sewage disposal.

While Limestone County lacks the i n d u s t r i a l base t o support such a program countywide a t present, some portion of the county services might be financed through such a mechanism.

The gross earnings o r so-called occupational taxes a t the local/municipal l e v e l a r e currently popular i n revenue analysis.

In Kentucky, Michigan, Maryland, Ohio, and Pennsylvania the concept has proved viable; and Gadsden and Birmingham have adopted similar measures.

The concept i d e a l of a "piggyback" local income tax, however, comes from the f a c t t h a t it provides more equity as a taxing basis than the sales tax.

I n an area such a s Limestone County, such a levy would not be p r a c t i c a l a t present due t o the strong out of county commuter work patterns and the detrimental e f f e c t i t would produce to n e w i n d u s t r i e s s t i l l i n t h e i r beginning stages.

178

V I.

Sales Tax Revenues The m o s t obvious s o u r c e of revenue t o t h e county is t h e sales t a x.

The s t a t e c u r r e n t l y a u t h o r i z e s e i g h t e e n o f its c o u n t i e s t o l e v y a d d i t i o n a l t a x e s beyond t h e state's f o u r c e n t s.

The mechanism is e f f i c i e n t and economical to t h e c o u n t i e s s i n c e t h e s t a t e collects and a d m i n i s t e r s t h e funds f o r a l l b u t t w o of t h e c o u n t i e s.

However, Limestone County p r e s e n t l y h a s a t h r e e c e n t s (3C) sales t a x c o u n t w i d e w i t h t h e C i t y o f Atheps l e v y i n q t h r z e c e n t s.

T h e o r e t i c a l l y, t h e county c o u l d raise i t s tax an a d d i t i o n a l one c e n t, b u t i n r e a l i t y, t h i s could n o t be done without endangering s e r i o u s l y its p o s i t i o n Of economic c o m p e t i t i o n since H u n t s v i l l e, the n e a r e s t major trade area also h a s a t h r e e c e n t rate.

Such a n i n c r e a s e would be expected t o r e t u r n approxi-mately one-fourth of one percent of t h e state-based tax r e t u r n i f it w e r e to be applied--it is n o t recommended a t t h i s t i m e.

T h i s t y p e o f revenue i n c r e a s e h a s t h e economic advantage of a l o w cost of collection s i n c e t h e e x i s t i n g S t a t e System would be u s e d.

Limestone County, however, is still a low-income county by n a t i o n a l p e r c a p i t a i n -

come s t a n d a r d s w i t h almost 20 p e r c e n t of its f a m i l i e s h a v i n g incomes below t h e poverty l e v e l (U.S. Census, 1980).

A sales t a x is by n a t u r e a r e g r e s s i v e t a x, and i t s burden f a l l s h e a v i e s t on t h o s e least able t o pay.

The Alabama r a t e of f o u r c e n t s is exceeded by o n l y s i x states i n t h e n a t i o n, and m o s t o f t h e s e s t a t e s exclude basic i t e m s, such as food and medicine.

I n d u s t r i a l growth, and a s s o c i a t e d rises i n per capita income, is o f primary importance to Limestone County t o maintain t h e modest progress experienced i n t h e p a s t decade.

N o revenue measure whicn would s e r i o u s l y handicap t h i s growth should be c o n s i d e r e d between 1983 and 1989.

V I I.

Excise/Luxury Tax Revenues The c o l l e c t i o n s f o r excise/luxury taxes i n Limestone County are n o t unduly l a r g e,

even c o n s i d e r i n g t h e low-level per capita incomes.

The tax rate s t r u c t u r e f o r t h e S t a t e of A l a b a m a is l o w, w i t h almost 60 p e r c e n t of t h e states having p e r s o n a l income taxes w i t h h i g h e r rates.

(See State and Local F i n a n c e s, 1972-77, Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental R e l a t i o n s, Washington, D.C.)

T h i s s t a t e t r e n d s u g g e s t s t h a t v a r i o u s forms o f selected local e x c i s e t a x e s p r o b a b l y h o l d t h e best low-burden revenue p o t e n t i a l f o r Limestone County as long as low Alabama S t a t e rates a r e i n effect.

V I I I.

Revenue Sharing F e d e r a l Revenue s h a r i n g monies are p r e s e n t l y a v a i l a b l e, b u t s g e c u l a t i v e s o u r c e o f revenue f o r local governmental u n i t s.

The major r e s e r v a t i o n about F e d e r a l revenue-sharing programs is t h e i r r e l a t i o n to cutbacks i n g e n e r a l F e d e r a l e x p e n d i t u r e policies.

N a t i o n a l l y, c o u n t i e s have been on t h e temporary r e c e i v i n g end of g e n e r a l F e d e r a l revenue s h a r i n g as n e t a d d i t i o n s to t o t a l county r e v e n u e s, while l o s i n g r e v e n u e s from reduced and non-equalizing F e d e r a l programs and r e d u c t i o n and e l i m i n a t i o n of c a t e g o r i c a l g r a n t s programs.

T h i s means t h a t revenue-sharing should be viewed as supplemental i n n a t u r e by Limestone County d u e to t h e i r u n s t a b l e n a t u r e.

C a p i t a l improvements and equipment purchase o f f u t u r e revenue production-oriented i n v e s t m e n t s r e p r e s e n t t h e m o s t p r o d u c t i v e u s e s for revenue s h a r i n g funds.

179

c In FY 1983, Limestone County had received just under $322,000 in Federal revenue-sharing funds. The bulk of the monies had either been spent, or earmarked for the following projects:

• Operating expenses and salaries for the Tax Assessor's and Tax Collector's Offices U

• Court House Renovation/Expansion

• Hospital/Health Expenditures

• Property Reassessment Revenue-sharing funds are highly advantageous to the couqty. High value, single-item projects such as the water system and property tax reassessment support the theory of revenue-sharing utilization for growth-oriented, single-item projects.

The county should make a specified effort to see that functions of the Tax Collector and Tax Assessor do not become dependent on this type of funds, except for the increased work load period associated with the property tax re-evaluation.

Future revenue-sharing funds would probably be well invested in other such single-item projects of the same type such as increased county fire protection equipment, industrial water and sewerage facilities, and perhaps, revenue-oriented, open space and park recreational developments along the Tennessee River. All of the possible proposals for such facilities are described in the Comprehensive Plan.

IX. Tennessee Valley Authority Payment In-Lieu of Taxes The TVA "reimburses" County, City, and Town Governments for revenue that would otherwise have been collected by local governments as property tax, if TVA were a privately-owned utility. These revenues, which were earmarked for local governments by the State L+islature in 1983, constituted $476,700 of revenue in FY 1982 It is expected that said revenues will increase by 5-6

, when the percentage increase will cease. Nevertheless, rising utility use by consumers and value-added-by-inflation will generally assist in maintaining an absolute dollar increase in revenues.

% until 1990 X.

Future Bonded Indebtedness Limestone County is presently usiny:10.9 percent of its authorized debt limit.

Since the 1980-1981 fiscal year, the percentage of debt limit authorization used has risen above 15.0 percent due to the need to provide portable water service to the county's developing urban and industrial areas.

amount of earmarked debt, as a percentage of the constitutional debt limit, will once more drop below 10 percent after four to five years. The water system expansion projects are being amortized on schedule, and the county's assessed valuation is continuing to increase. The water system improvements installed between 1980 and 1983 are already providing impetus to new growth.

is assisting in amortizing the bonds presently outstanding and in increasing the total assessed valuation of countywide property.

It is expected that the This growth 180

Provided future trends in bondinq capacity follow trends over the last ten years, Limestone County should be in a position to maintain a reverse of non-obligated bonding capacity, sufficient to meet the needs of the Capital Improvements Budget.

This plan strongly recommends that capital expenditures under $25,000 in cost be paid for via the general fund. This policy would allow the county to reserve its unobligated bonding capacity for larger capital projects, such as public works endeavors. (these programs refer to non-reven%e based bonds)

IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM This implementation program is designed to assist the county in effectuating the plan proposals and making this Comprehensive Plan a reality.

some of the measures for implementation with the land use plan of Limestone County, the following recommendations are given. Short range (1983-1989) has reference to items that can be accomplished in the first one to six years of the planning period.

Long range (1990-2000) items would be completed in the remaining years of the planning period.

To relate more specifically MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT (1983-1989)

1. Land use regulations should be enacted as recommended by the Limestone County Planning Program in order to provide for controlled and coordinated growth in the urban and rural areas of the County. A full-time administrator should be hired to enact the land use regulations.

2. Building and housing codes should be enacted to insure sound new construction and development as well as to upgrade older, unsound structures.

3.

Better housing is needed for many Limestone County residents. A housing program should be implemented to encourage the development of public housing units for low-income families. Federal loans could be utilized to purchase, remodel and rent existing housing for the development of public housing units.

New housing units could be built through a housing authority or by other non-profit corporations which are eligible for Federal loans for construction of low-rent housing. The Top of Alabama Regional Housing Authority has initiated variable programs in this area.

4.

The Comprehensive Plan of Limestone County should be publicized through the news media as well as public hearings to enlist public interest. The Board of County Commissioners should follow-up public interest with the formal adoption of the Plan. Citizen groups should be informed of the overall planning efforts and asked to help with its promotion as a long-range goal.

(1990-2000)

1. Land use regulations should be continually encouraged and administered in Limestone County to protect growing urban-and rural-residential areas.

2.

Capital improvements should be scheduled annually in the Capital Irnpro,,-ements Program based on the land use plan, community facilities plan and county growth trends.

181

3. The county planning program should be continued in order to update physical plans to meet growth needs and to assist county leaders in anticipating these needs as far in advance as practicable.

AGRICLJLTURAL, RURAL AND LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT (1983-1989)

1. Land use policies and provisions in the Land Use Plan should be adopted to

,protect prime agricultural land from rampant speculation efforts and undesirable growth Aeffects.

2.

Rural community leaders and interested citizens should be encouraged in their L effortsfto improve housing conditions, local economic and education levels, as well

,as local recreational facilities. Improvements in these local ccmmunities could be promoted through such programs as (FHA) Rural Development Loans and Rural Housing Loans, and through programs sponsored by the Appalachian Regional Commission.

3.

Overall community development and land conservation progras should be encouraged and promoted through coordination with soil, agricultural and other county agencies.

(1999-2000)

1. Limestone County should continue to implement major count;. roa2 improvements through coordination with other local governments as well as the Alabama Highway Department and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Financial 9lans for major expenditures for road improvements should be included in the County Capital Improvements Program.

2. Rural community development and improvement efforts should be continued through the coordination of land management and environmental improvement programs of county, regional, state, and federal agencies, especially the Limestone County Rural Development Committee.

INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT (1983-19891

1. Land use regulations and policies should be adopted in order to promote industrial development and to reserve prime industrial land in Linestone County.

2. Desirable standards for new industrial development should be encouraged through the enactment of performance requirements and encouragement of private landowner's use of restrictive covenants.

3.

Land use regulations and policies should be adopted to emFc;?asize desirable commercial development in Limestone County.

ii 4.

Compact commercial development should be encouraged in order to avoid scattered, I

strip development along major roads and highways. Utility policies via utility permit refusal can discourage strip development.

I 182

5. Comme?cial recreation and tourism should be promoted through a development commission (or "tourist commission") to encourage this type of activity for Limestone County. This type of "industry" could be greatly increased through proper coordination and promotion. The successful trade record of the Athens-Limestone Development Committee could possibly be transferred to a similar trade record for tourism.

(1990-2000)

1. The expanded use of industrial educational facilities by residents of all county communities should be encouraged in order to promote better income levels countywide. This increased education and training will encourage more diversified industrial development with more and better job opportunities.

2. The Comprehensive Plan as well as land use regulations should be continually updated in order to keep pace with growth trends in the county in regard to additional commercial areas needed to complement residential and industrial development.

3. The conservation of water, forests and other natural resources in industrial and commercial growth should be continually emphasized through land use control as well as cooperation from private developers.

FORESTRY, OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION (1983-1989)

1. Potential recreation sites should be acquired through private efforts, a Limestone County Park Board, possible Federal assistance through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, or a combination of these efforts--particularly in areas of historical significance or where natural and scenic features exist.

2. Potential recreation sites should be given particular attention or protection of forests and conservation resources through proper land management. The Alabama Forestry Commission can provide assistance in this effort.

3. Commercial recreation ventures should be encouraged and aided by the county government when in conformance with the Limestone County Land Use Plan and overall county improvement. This may be accomplished through long-term leasing of public property to individuals, or firms, federal cost sharing, or state assistance--and may require special legislation in some cases. Such efforts could mean much to Limestone County, both in economic and recreational benefits.

(1990-2000)

1. Acquisition efforts for prime recreational land should continue, particularly in the vicinity of the Elk River, the Piney Creek, Limestone Creek and Sugar Creek area, the Joe Wheeler State Park area and such natural features as caves, hills, and the lake.

2. A Limestone County Park Board should be given support in an attempt to provide funding or varied activities or all age groups.

3.

Protection of forest resources from destructive effects of fire, insects, disease and uncontrolled grazing should be emphasized.

183

c 4.

The p u b l i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d education c o n c e r n i n g t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n s e r v a t i o n of a l l c o u n t y n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s s h o u l d be promoted.

TRANSPORTATION (1983-1989)

1.

Countywide t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n s in'conjunction w i t h t h e F l a n n i n g and Programming D i v i s i o n of t h e Highway D e p a r t m e n t should be adopted.

n e c e s s a r y, s h o u l d i n c l u d e c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n P l a n n i n g O r g a n i z a t i o n i n n e i g h b o r i n g Madison County.

Cooperative p l a n n i n g when

2.

Clmplementation of t h e S h a n g h a i Road improvement i n t h e w e s t e r n s e c t i o n o f t h e c o u n t y s h o u l d b e g i n as e a r l y a s possible.

3-The f o u r - l a n i n g of Alabama Highway 53 from H u n t s v i l l e to Ardmore s h o u l d b e g i n,

and a new a l i g n m e n t d u e w e s t from Highway 53 t o 1-65 v i a Elkwood S e c t i o n Road s h o u l d be i n i t i a t e d, f o r a r e l o c a t e d S t a t e Highway 53.

4.

A new two-lane bridge f o r U. S. 7 2 s h o u l d s p a n t h e E l k R i v e r, p a r a l l e l to t h e e x i s t i n g U. S.

7 2 Elk Rover bridge.

5.

Community b e a u t i f i c a t i o n as w e l l as r u r a l c o u n t y road improvements s h o u l d be e n c o u r a g e d t h r o u g h c i v i c o r g a n i z a t i o n s and o e h e r i n t e r e s t e d c o u n t y r e s i d e n t s.

The R u r a l Development C o m m i t t e e c a n be of a s s i s t a n c e i n t h i s e f f o r t.

6.

County s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s s h o u l d be promoted and adopted to p r o v i d e for improved t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t e s i n t h e c o u n t y.

(1990-2000)

1. The T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n, i n c l u d i n g t h e a r t e r i a l highways, collector r o a d s and local roads s h o u l d be f u r t h e r implemented.

2.

T h o r o u g h f a r e improvements s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n u p d a t i n g p l a n s to s e r v e d e v e l o p i n g r e s i d e n t i a l, commercial i n d u s t r i a l and r e c r e a t i o n a l a r e z s.

CONCLUSION The need f o r a c o n t i n u i n g p l a n n i n g program i n Limestone County w i l l become i n c r e a s i n g l y i m p o r t a n t i n view o f t h e projected p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 56,000 r e s i d e n t s b y t h e y e a r 1990, and 65,000 by t h e y e a r 2000.

T h i s P l a n h a s attempted to f u l f i l l t h e n e e d for p l a n n i n g the f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t of Limestone County.

The p r i m a r y objective o f the Comprehensive P l a n is t o p r o v i d e a p o l i c y framework f o r f u t u r e d e c i s i o n making by t h e County l e a d e r s.

Another objective is t h e p r e v e n t i o n of u n c o o r d i n a t e d, u n c o n t r o l l e d, scattered d e v e l o p m e n t p a t t e r n s t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u n t y, as is t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n o f L i m e s t o n e C o u n t y ' s o u t -

s t a n d i n g n a t u r a l and s c e n i c b e a u t y and prime a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d.

The P l a n i n s u r e s proper l o c a t i o n s for r e s i d e n t i a l, commerical, i n d u s t r i a l a n d r e c r e a t i o n a l as w e l l a s a t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m c o n s i s t i n g o f e f f i c i e n t and s a f e t h o r o u g h f a r e s.

1 1

I 184

1 I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

1 1

I I

I c

APPENDIX 185

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

1.

A summary o r a b s t r a c t of the proposed p l a n ( s ) or p o l i c i e s :

The Comprehensive Plan presents a development plan for Limestone County, coverning a planning period of 1982-2000.

T h i s P l a n includes plans f o r land use, community f a c i l i t i e s, transportation, and a c a p i t a l improvements program and c a p i t a l improvements budget.

Also included is a program f o r o v e r a l l plan implementation, which emphasizes various avenues of coopera-t i v e endeavors t o be undertaken by the municipalities and county govern-ment.

The Plan stresses several "growth corridors" i n Limestone County where future urban growth should occur because public f a c i l i t i e s, u t i l i t i e s,

and transportation services can be most e a s i l y developed i n these corridor areas.

2.

The environmental impact (beneficial as w e l l a s adverse) of the proposed p l a n ( s ) o r p o l i c i e s, i f they are c a r r i e d out:

ImFlementation of t h i s plan w i l l r e s u l t i n the improvement of the physical, s o c i a l, and economic environmental sectors.

This w i l l be accomplished by providing a system of streets and p a t t e r n of land use commensurate with public u t i l i t i e s and services.

3.

Any adverse environmental e f f e c t s which cannot be avoided should t h e pro-posed p l a n ( s ) o r p o l i c i e s be implemented:

Implementation of the proposed plan w i l l lead t o the physical improvement of the e x i s t i n g manmade environment and the a l t e r a t i o n of the n a t u r a l en-vironment.

Construction a c t i v i t i e s w i l l be involved during implementation, therefore creating unavoidable adverse impacts ( i. e. noise, dust, d i s r u p -

t i o n t o surface water run-off, inconvenience t o people, e t c. ).

A l l un-avoidable adverse impacts are temporary i n nature and with proper pre-cautions they can be lessened.

In addition, adverse impacts w i l l be les-sened due t o the length of t i m e needed t o implement the proposed p r o j e c t.

Based on a eighteen year planning period, development and construction of t h i s project w i l l not take place a l l a t one t i m e.

4.

Alternative t o the proposed p l a n ( s ) o r p o l i c i e s and an analysis of those a l t e r n a t i v e s :

There are several possible a l t e r n a t i v e s t o t h i s plan due t o its f l e x i b i l i t y and nature.

year period and, therefore, it must be f l e x i b l e enough t o be a l t e r e d when necessary.

The plan provides guidance f o r development over an eighteen There is one major a l t e r n a t i v e and t h a t is no planned growth.

residents and government of Limestone County decided against t h i s alterna-t i v e when they entered i n t o the Comprehensive Planning Program.

However, the 186

5.

The r e l a t i o n s h i p, under t h e proposed p l a n ( s ) or p o l i c i e s, between l o c a l short-term uses o f man's environment and t h e maintenance and enhance-ment o f long-term p r o d u c t i v i t y :

The proposed p l a n s and policies give d i r e c t i o n f o r t h e construction of physical improvements t h a t w i l l allow man t o l i v e i n better harmony with h i s environment.

to enhance t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p and i n c r e a s e t h e long-term productivity%f both.

However, t h e proposed p l a n w i l l have t o be properly supervised and c o n t r o l l e d i f t h i s type of r e l a t i o n s h i p is t o be a t t a i n e d.

These short-term uses of man's environment are designed

6.

Any irreversible and i r r e t r i e v a b l e commitments of resources which would be involved i f t h e proposed p l a n ( s ) or policies should be implemented:

Implementation of t h e proposed plan would commit t h r e e i r r e v e r s i b l e re-sources; namely t h e use of land, t h e use of b u i l d i n g materials, and t h e removal o f vegetation i n v a r i o u s areas of t h e county.

mitment of t h e s e resources cannot be avoided i f development is to t a k e Place, i n accordance with a p l a n or without a plan.

However, t h e com-

7.

A statement s e t t i n g f o r t h applicable Federal, S t a t e, and l o c a l environmental controls :

The Federal Environmental Controls u t i l i z e d i n analyzing development p l a n s and projects are t h e following:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

1 2.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

Federal Water Quality A c t of 1965 1966 Clean Water Restoration A c t,

1963 Clean A i r A c t,

1967 A i r Quality A c t,

S o l i d waste D i s p o s a l A c t of 1965, and Resource Recovery A c t of 1970, N.E.P.A.,

1970 (P.L.91-190),

HUD Handbook, 1390.2 N o i s e Abatement and Control, 8/2/71, Flood Disaster P r o t e c t i o n A c t, 1973, Water P o l l u t i o n Control A c t, 1972, Clean A i r A c t, 1967-1970, Water P o l l u t i o n Control A c t, 1974, Coastal Zone A c t, 1972 ( n o t a p p l i c a b l e ),

F i s h and Wildlife Coordination A c t, 1958, National Historic Preservation A c t, 1964, Executive Order 11953, Historic and Archaeological A c t, 1974, Protection of Historic and C u l t u r a l P r o p e r t i e s, Reg. (1/25/74) 39 FR 3366, Local Controls:

These c o n t r o l s w i l l include zoning ordinances, subdivision r e g u l a t i o n s, housing, building, and f i r e prevention codes.

The State and local agencies responsible f o r developing r u l e s and r e g u l a for t h e above Federal programs a r e :

i o n s r I 187

1.

Alabama A i r P o l l u t i o n Control Commission,

2.

A l a b a m a Water Improvement Commission 3.

Alabama S t a t e Health Department, and 4.

Local Health Departments.

In a d d i t i o n, s e v e r a l Federal a g e n c i e s, namely t h e Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency (EPA), t h e Council on Environmental Q u a l i t y (CEQ) which w a s c r e a t e d by t h e N a t i o n a l Environmental P o l i c y A c t of 1970, and t h e O f f i c e of Environzental Control which w a s created by t h e Environmental Q u a l i t y Improvement A c t of 1970, r e q u i r e t h a t a t t e n t i o n be paid t o c e r t a i n environmental c o n s i d e r a t i o n s.

When Federal monies are used i n v a r i o u s p h a s e s of t h e proposed project, it w i l l be necessary t o be o g n i z a n t of applicable Federal r e g u l a t i o n s.

188 I

1 1

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I 1