forked from nm3clol/nm3clol-public
15445 lines
543 KiB
Markdown
15445 lines
543 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
type: document
|
||
title: Town-of-Tazewell-Comprehensive-Plan-2016
|
||
file: ../Town-of-Tazewell-Comprehensive-Plan-2016.pdf
|
||
tags:
|
||
- Cumberland_Plateau_Planning_District_Commission
|
||
docDate: null
|
||
contentType: application/pdf
|
||
contentLength: 14778668
|
||
sha256sum: 9225c3b968248e064a44d23aff77c7370dd1b278a8172c1cb225eef48edd01ad
|
||
sha1sum: ed5526d1426f3eee02f8081a3a5a3ad6cc1de503
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
May 2016
|
||
|
||
COMPREHENSIVE PBAN
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
err
|
||
oe
|
||
|
||
May 2016
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
TOWN COUNCIL
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TOWN PLANNING COMMISSION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TOWN STAFF
|
||
|
||
|
||
Updated: May 2016 David Hilton This plan was prepared in cooperation with the members of the Tazewell Planning Commission,
|
||
Town staff and project consultants. The plan was approved by the Planning Commission following
|
||
|
||
a public hearing on and recommended to Town Council. Town Council
|
||
adopted the Plan following a second public hearing on .
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
A. Donald Buchanan, Mayor
|
||
Dr. Terry Mullins, Vice-Mayor
|
||
|
||
Jack Murray
|
||
Dr. Glenn Catron
|
||
Dr. Chris Brown
|
||
|
||
Jerry McReynolds
|
||
David Fox
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Todd Day, Town Manager
|
||
Robin Brewster, Exe. Assistant
|
||
|
||
Donny Pruitt, Public Works Director
|
||
Chris Hurley, Zoning & Property Maintenance
|
||
|
||
I
|
||
|
||
Susan Reeves
|
||
Charity McDaniel
|
||
|
||
Benny Moore
|
||
Jack Murray
|
||
|
||
Kenneth Mulkey
|
||
Richard Taylor
|
||
Edith Jackson
|
||
|
||
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
TOWN COUNCIL
|
||
|
||
A. Donald Buchanan, Mayor
|
||
Dr. Terry Mullins, Vice-Mayor
|
||
Jack Murray
|
||
Dr. Glenn Catron
|
||
Dr. Chris Brown
|
||
Jerry McReynolds
|
||
David Fox
|
||
|
||
TOWN PLANNING COMMISSION
|
||
|
||
Susan Reeves
|
||
Charity McDaniel
|
||
Benny Moore
|
||
Jack Murray
|
||
Kenneth Mulkey
|
||
Richard Taylor
|
||
Edith Jackson
|
||
|
||
TOWN STAFF
|
||
|
||
Todd Day, Town Manager
|
||
Robin Brewster, Exe. Assistant
|
||
Donny Pruitt, Public Works Director
|
||
Chris Hurley, Zoning & Property Maintenance
|
||
|
||
Updated: May 2016 David Hilton
|
||
|
||
This plan was prepared in cooperation with the members of the Tazewell Planning Commission,
|
||
Town staff and project consultants. The plan was approved by the Planning Commission following
|
||
a public hearing on and recommended to Town Council
|
||
|
||
adopted the Plan following a second public hearing on
|
||
i)
|
||
|
||
Town Council
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
||
I. INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
II. BACKGROUND ANALYSIS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
III. COMMUNITY FACILITIES & SERVICES
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
IV. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
|
||
V. PLAN ELEMENTS
|
||
|
||
VI. FUTURE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION PLAN
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
VII. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNTIY PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 63
|
||
TRAILS, GREENWAYS, AND GATEWAYS PLAN 72
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES 08
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE 12
|
||
POPULATION & HOUSING 19
|
||
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 30
|
||
|
||
EMERGENCY SERVICES & PUBLIC SAFETY 3 9
|
||
PUBLIC WORKS 42
|
||
PARKS AND RECREATION 46
|
||
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES 46
|
||
LIBRARIES 49
|
||
MEDICAL AND HEALTH CARE FACILITIES 49
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN 89
|
||
TRANSPORTATION PLAN 106
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX 114
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 125
|
||
|
||
FOREWORD 01
|
||
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY 01
|
||
REGIONAL SETTING 03
|
||
PLANNING AREAS AND FACTORS 04
|
||
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 05 08
|
||
|
||
39
|
||
|
||
50
|
||
63
|
||
|
||
89
|
||
|
||
114
|
||
|
||
01
|
||
|
||
II
|
||
|
||
Vi
|
||
|
||
Vil.
|
||
|
||
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
FOREWORD
|
||
|
||
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
|
||
REGIONAL SETTING
|
||
|
||
PLANNING AREAS AND FACTORS
|
||
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
|
||
|
||
BACKGROUND ANALYSIS
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
POPULATION & HOUSING
|
||
FCONOMIC CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY FACILITIES & SERVICES
|
||
EMERGENCY SERVICES & PUBLIC SAFETY
|
||
PUBLIC WORKS.
|
||
|
||
PARKS AND RECREATION
|
||
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
LIBRARIES
|
||
|
||
MEDICAL AND HEALTH CARE FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
PLAN ELEMENTS.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNTIY PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
|
||
TRAILS, GREENWAYS, AND GATEWAYS PLAN
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION PLAN
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.
|
||
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
|
||
|
||
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES.
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
ot
|
||
a1
|
||
03
|
||
04
|
||
05
|
||
|
||
08
|
||
|
||
08
|
||
12
|
||
19
|
||
30
|
||
|
||
39
|
||
|
||
63
|
||
|
||
63
|
||
72
|
||
|
||
89
|
||
|
||
89
|
||
106
|
||
|
||
114
|
||
|
||
114
|
||
125
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
2.1 General Soil Suitability 09
|
||
2.2 Existing Land Use 16
|
||
2.3 Town Total Population, 1970-2014 20
|
||
2.4 Median Age Comparisons. Region and State, 1960-2014 21
|
||
Town Population Change, 1990-2014 (Figure 1) 22
|
||
2.5 Town Population Age Distribution, 1990-2014 22
|
||
2.6 Population Change, Cumberland Plateau PDC and Virginia, 1990-2014 23
|
||
Population Change in the PDC, 1960-2014 (Figure 2) 24
|
||
2.7 Town Linear Population Forecast, 1970-2020 25
|
||
2.8 Historical population Growth and Forecast, Town and County, 1970-2020 25
|
||
2.9 Total Housing Units by Type, 1990-2014 26
|
||
Age of Housing Stock (Figure 3) 27
|
||
2.10 Total Housing units built by Year 27
|
||
2.11 Employment by industry Group 31
|
||
2.12 Top 25 Employers in the Tazewell Area 32
|
||
2.13 Regional Labor Force Employment Status 33
|
||
2.14 Place of Work by Workers 34
|
||
2.15 Taxable Sales by County in the PDC 35
|
||
2.16 Median Household income, 1989 & 1999 36
|
||
2.17 Individuals below the Poverty Line, 1989, 1999 & 2009 36
|
||
3.1 Town Water Service Areas 44
|
||
3.2 Public School Enrollment 47
|
||
View Shed Zones (Figure 4) 86
|
||
|
||
III
|
||
|
||
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
|
||
|
||
2.4 General Soil Suitability
|
||
|
||
2.2 Existing Land Use
|
||
|
||
2.3 Town Total Population, 1970-2014
|
||
|
||
2.4 Median Age Comparisons. Region and State, 1960-2014
|
||
‘Town Population Change, 1990-2014 (Figure 1)
|
||
|
||
2.5 Town Population Age Distribution, 1990-2014
|
||
|
||
2.6 Population Change, Cumberland Plateau PDC and Virginia, 1990-2014
|
||
Population Change in the PDC, 1960-2014 (Figure 2)
|
||
|
||
2.7 Town Linear Population Forecast, 1970-2020
|
||
|
||
2.8 Historical population Growth and Forecast, Town and County, 1970-2020
|
||
|
||
2.9 Total Housing Units by Type, 1990-2014
|
||
Age of Housing Stock (Figure 3)
|
||
|
||
2.10 Total Housing units built by Year
|
||
|
||
2.11 Employment by industry Group
|
||
|
||
2.12 Top 25 Employers in the Tazewell Area
|
||
|
||
2.13 Regional Labor Force Employment Status
|
||
|
||
2.14 Place of Work by Workers
|
||
|
||
2.15 Taxable Sales by County in the PDC
|
||
|
||
2.16 Median Household income, 1989 & 1999
|
||
|
||
2.17 Individuals below the Poverty Line, 1989, 1999 & 2009
|
||
|
||
3.1 Town Water Service Areas
|
||
|
||
3.2 Public School Enrollment
|
||
|
||
View Shed Zones (Figure 4)
|
||
|
||
09
|
||
16
|
||
20
|
||
21
|
||
22
|
||
22
|
||
23
|
||
24
|
||
25
|
||
25
|
||
26
|
||
27
|
||
27
|
||
31
|
||
32
|
||
33
|
||
34
|
||
35
|
||
36
|
||
36
|
||
44
|
||
47
|
||
86
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
LIST OF MAP AND PLAN EXHIBITS
|
||
|
||
1. Regional Location 04
|
||
2. Planning Area 04
|
||
3. Planning Factors 04
|
||
4. Historic District 06
|
||
5. Environmental Constraints 09
|
||
6. Existing Land Use 13
|
||
7. Existing Community Facilities 40
|
||
8. Public Water Facilities 44
|
||
9. Public Sewer Facilities 44
|
||
10. Community Preservation and Development 64
|
||
11. Concept Plan - Historic Railway Area Preservation 66
|
||
12. Adaptive Reuse - Vacant Food Lion Building 67
|
||
14. Land Use Concept Plan - Conference Center Facility 68
|
||
15. Potential Greenways and Gateways 73
|
||
16. Greenway Concept 75
|
||
17. Gateway Concept 83
|
||
18. Future Land Use 90
|
||
19. Traffic Volumes and Proposed Transportation Improvements 110
|
||
20. Town Zoning Districts 127
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Following Page
|
||
|
||
iv
|
||
|
||
LIST OF MAP AND PLAN EXHIBITS
|
||
|
||
1. Regional Location
|
||
|
||
2. Planning Area
|
||
|
||
3. Planning Factors
|
||
|
||
4, Historic District
|
||
|
||
5. Environmental Constraints
|
||
|
||
6. Existing Land Use
|
||
|
||
7. Existing Community Facilities
|
||
|
||
8. Public Water Facilities
|
||
|
||
9. Public Sewer Facilities
|
||
|
||
10. Community Preservation and Development
|
||
|
||
11. Concept Plan - Historic Railway Area Preservation
|
||
12. Adaptive Reuse - Vacant Food Lion Building
|
||
|
||
14. Land Use Concept Plan - Conference Center Facility
|
||
15. Potential Greenways and Gateways
|
||
|
||
16. Greenway Concept
|
||
|
||
17. Gateway Concept
|
||
|
||
18. Future Land Use
|
||
|
||
19. Traffic Volumes and Proposed Transportation Improvements
|
||
20. Town Zoning Districts
|
||
|
||
Following Page
|
||
04
|
||
|
||
04
|
||
04
|
||
06
|
||
09
|
||
13
|
||
40
|
||
44
|
||
44
|
||
64
|
||
66
|
||
67
|
||
68
|
||
B
|
||
7S
|
||
83
|
||
90
|
||
|
||
110
|
||
|
||
127
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
I N T R O D U C T I O N
|
||
Page 1
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
“We mountaineers never forget our native place, and we go back as often as possible…Our place will always be
|
||
close on our minds.” —From” Appalachian Values”,
|
||
- Loyal Jones.
|
||
|
||
FOREWORD This document is a plan, a framework within which residents and leaders of the Town of Tazewell can work
|
||
together to guide the development of the Town. It has a long-range perspective, to the year 2025 and
|
||
beyond. It attempts to identify issues the community may face, and opportunities that it might capitalize on
|
||
for the common good.
|
||
|
||
Because certain assumptions have been made with regard to future development, some of the issues or
|
||
needs that this plan envisions may not come to pass. Predictions about population, housing, transportation
|
||
needs and economic conditions may not occur. The rural character of the area, which contributes to town’s
|
||
scenic beauty, continues to evolve. Technology continues to evolve. As a result, some of the recommended
|
||
land use policies, capital improvements and other actions may not be implemented.
|
||
|
||
Given this context, decisions concerning the plan’s implementation should be made by leaders and residents
|
||
in a timely and orderly manner to preserve the Town’s farmland, historic assets, scenic vistas, and natural
|
||
features in order to protect a part of what the Nature Conservancy de f i nes as one of the world’s “Twenty
|
||
Last Great Places.”
|
||
|
||
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY Virginia planning legislation requires the Town Planning Commission to prepare a Comprehensive Plan
|
||
indicating the Commission’s long-range recommendations for general development. The plan is to be
|
||
based on careful and comprehensive studies of existing conditions, trends of growth and probable future
|
||
requirements of the community.
|
||
|
||
The comprehensive plan may include, but need not be limited to: (1) the designation of areas for various
|
||
types of public and private development and use; (2) designation of a system of transportation facilities
|
||
including streets, bridges and the like; (3) delineation of a system of community service facilities such as
|
||
schools, parks, public buildings, utilities and other like facilities; and (4) the designation of historical areas
|
||
and areas for urban renewal or other treatment.
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
“We mountaineers never forget our native place, and we go back as often as possible...Our place will always be
|
||
close on our minds." —From” Appalachian Values",
|
||
- Loyal Jones.
|
||
|
||
FOREWORD
|
||
|
||
This document is a plan, a framework within which residents and leaders of the Town of Tazewell can work
|
||
together to guide the development of the Town. It has a long-range perspective, to the year 2025 and
|
||
beyond. It attempts to identify issues the community may face, and opportunities that it might capitalize on
|
||
for the common good.
|
||
|
||
Because certain assumptions have been made with regard to future development, some of the issues or
|
||
needs that this plan envisions may not come to pass. Predictions about population, housing, transportation
|
||
needs and economic conditions maynot occur. The rural character of the area, which contributes to town’s
|
||
scenicbeauty, continues to evolve. Technology continuesto evolve. Asa result, some of the recommended
|
||
land use policies, capital improvements and other actions may not be implemented.
|
||
|
||
Given this context, decisions concerning the plan's implementation should be made by leaders and residents
|
||
in a timely and orderly manner to preserve the Town's farmland, historic assets, scenic vistas, and natural
|
||
features in order to protect a part of what the Nature Conservancy defines as one of the world’s “Twenty
|
||
Last Great Places.”
|
||
|
||
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
|
||
|
||
Virginia planning legislation requires the Town Planning Commission to prepare a Comprehensive Plan
|
||
indicating the Commission's long-range recommendations for general development. The plan is to be
|
||
based on careful and comprehensive studies of existing conditions, trends of growth and probable future
|
||
requirements of the community,
|
||
|
||
The comprehensive plan may include, but need not be limited to: (1) the designation of areas for various
|
||
types of public and private development and use; (2) designation of a system of transportation facilities,
|
||
including streets, bridges and the like; (3) delineation of a system of community service facilities such as
|
||
schools, parks, public buildings, utilities and other like facilities; and (4) the designation of historical areas
|
||
andareas for urban renewal or other treatment.
|
||
|
||
Page 1 —
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
I N T R O D U C T I O N
|
||
Page 2
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
After public notice and hearings, the Planning Commission may, by
|
||
resolution, recommend a comprehensive plan, or parts of a plan, to the
|
||
Town Council. The Council then considers the plan at the public hearings
|
||
and adopts, or amends and adopts the plan. Once adopted by Town Council,
|
||
the Comprehensive Plan: ...shall be general in nature, in that it shall designate the general or approximate
|
||
location, character and extent of each feature shown on the plan and shall
|
||
indicate where existing lands or facilities are proposed to be extended, widened,
|
||
removed, relocated, vacated, narrowed, abandoned, or changed in use as
|
||
the case may be. The plan, with the accompanying maps, plats, charts, and
|
||
descriptive matter, shall show the locality’s long-range recommendations for
|
||
the general development of the territory covered by the plan. It may include,
|
||
but need not be limited to: 1. The designation of areas for various types of public and private
|
||
|
||
development and use, such as different kinds of residential, business,
|
||
industrial, agricultural, mineral resources, conservation, recreation,
|
||
public service, flood plain and drainage, and other areas; 2. The designation of a system of transportation facilities such as streets,
|
||
roads, highways, parkways, railways, bridges, viaducts, waterways,
|
||
airports, ports, terminals, and other like facilities; 3. The designation of a system of community service facilities, such as
|
||
parks, forests, schools, playgrounds, public buildings and institutions,
|
||
hospitals, community centers, waterworks, sewage disposal or waste
|
||
disposal areas, and the like; 4. The designation of historical areas and areas for urban renewal or
|
||
other treatment; 5. The designation of areas for the implementation of reasonable ground
|
||
water protection measures; 6. An official map, a capital improvements program, a subdivision
|
||
ordinance, a zoning ordinance and zoning district maps, mineral
|
||
resource district maps and agricultural and forestall district maps,
|
||
where applicable; 7. The location of existing or proposed recycling centers. The plan shall include: designation of areas for the implementation of
|
||
|
||
measures to promote the construction and maintenance of affordable
|
||
housing, sufficient to meet the current and future needs of residents of all
|
||
levels of income in the locality while considering the current and future
|
||
needs of the planning district within which the locality is situated.
|
||
|
||
|
||
1 Code of Virginia 1950, Title 15.2 Chapter 22 as amended, Subsection
|
||
15.2-2223
|
||
|
||
After public notice and hearings, the Planning Commission may, by
|
||
resolution, recommend a comprehensive plan, or parts of a plan, to the
|
||
‘Town Council. The Council then considers the plan at the public hearings
|
||
and adopts, or amends and adopts the plan. Once adopted by Town Council,
|
||
the Comprehensive Plan:
|
||
|
||
shall be general in nature, in that it shall designate the general or approximate
|
||
location, character and extent of each feature shown on the plan and shall
|
||
indicate where existing lands or facilities are proposed to be extended, widened,
|
||
removed, relocated, vacated, narrowed, abandoned, or changed in use as
|
||
the case may be. The plan, with the accompanying maps, plats, charts, and
|
||
descriptive matter, shall show the locality's long-range recommendations for
|
||
the general development of the territory covered by the plan. It may include,
|
||
but need not be limited to:
|
||
|
||
1. The designation of areas for various types of public and private
|
||
development and use, such as different kinds of residential, business,
|
||
industrial, agricultural, mineral resources, conservation, recreation,
|
||
public service, flood plain and drainage, and other areas;
|
||
|
||
2. The designation ofa system of transportation facilities such as streets,
|
||
toads, highways, parkways, railways, bridges, viaducts, waterways,
|
||
)orts, ports, terminals, and other like facili
|
||
|
||
3. The designation of a system of community service facilities, such as,
|
||
parks, forests, schools, playgrounds, public buildings and institutions,
|
||
hospitals, community centers, waterworks, sewage disposal or waste
|
||
disposal areas, and the like;
|
||
|
||
4, The designation of historical areas and areas for urban renewal or
|
||
other treatment;
|
||
|
||
5. The designation of areas for the implementation of reasonable ground
|
||
water protection measures;
|
||
|
||
6. An official map, a capital improvements program, a subdivision
|
||
ordinance, a zoning ordinance and zoning district maps, mineral
|
||
resource district maps and agricultural and forestall district maps,
|
||
where applicable:
|
||
|
||
7. The location of existing or proposed recycling centers.
|
||
|
||
The plan shall include: designation of areas for the implementation of
|
||
measures to promote the construction and maintenance of affordable
|
||
housing, sufficient to meet the current and future needs of residents of all
|
||
levels of income in the locality while considering the current and future
|
||
needs of the planning district within which the locality is situated.
|
||
|
||
* Code of Virginia 1950, Title 15.2 Chapter 22 as amended, Subsection
|
||
15.2-2223
|
||
|
||
Page 2 —
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
I N T R O D U C T I O N
|
||
Page 3
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Subsequent amendments to the plan must be adopted according to the
|
||
public notice and hearing procedure followed for the adoption of the original
|
||
plan. At least once every five years the commission is required to conduct
|
||
a thorough review of the plan to determine whether amendments are
|
||
warranted.
|
||
REGIONAL SETTING The Town of Tazewell, the county seat of Tazewell County, is located in the
|
||
central portion of the County, which is in the southwestern part of Virginia,
|
||
approximately 85 miles southwest of Roanoke and 80 miles northeast of
|
||
Bristol (see Regional Location Map). The main highways in Tazewell County
|
||
are U. S. 19 and U. S. 460, which run from Bluefield through the Town of
|
||
Tazewell, north through Richland’s and southwest toward Bristol. State Route
|
||
16 runs north into West Virginia and south into North Carolina. State Route
|
||
61 connects Tazewell with Rocky Gap to the east. All of these major access
|
||
routes intersect Interstate 81, a primary link between the northeast and
|
||
southeast United States, and Interstate 77 which cuts across the Appalachian
|
||
Mountain Range and connects southern coastal states with the Midwest.
|
||
|
||
The Town of Tazewell and Tazewell County are included in the Cumberland
|
||
Plateau Planning District, which is comprised o f four counties: Buchanan,
|
||
Dickenson, Russell and Tazewell. The counties and selected towns within
|
||
the Planning District, including their respective populations (2013 Census)
|
||
are as follows:
|
||
|
||
COUNTIES IN THE PLANNING DISTRICT POPULATION
|
||
Dickenson 15,486
|
||
Buchanan 23,596
|
||
Russell 28,264
|
||
Tazewell 44,103
|
||
|
||
TOWNS IN THE PLANNING DISTRICT POPULATION
|
||
Bluefield 5,392
|
||
Richlands 5,671
|
||
Tazewell 4,627
|
||
Lebanon 3,424
|
||
Grundy 1,021
|
||
Clintwood 1,383
|
||
Honaker 1,449
|
||
Cedar Bluff 1,137
|
||
Pocahontas 391
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010-2013
|
||
|
||
Subsequent amendments to the plan must be adopted according to the
|
||
Public notice and hearing procedure followed for the adoption of the original
|
||
plan. Atleast once every five years the commission is required to conduct
|
||
a thorough review of the plan to determine whether amendments are
|
||
warranted.
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL SETTING
|
||
|
||
The Town of Tazewell, the county seat of Tazewell County, is located in the
|
||
central portion of the County, which is in the southwestern part of Virginia,
|
||
approximately 85 miles southwest of Roanoke and 80 miles northeast of
|
||
Bristol (see Regional Location Map). The main highways in Tazewell County
|
||
are U. S. 19 and U. S. 460, which run from Bluefield through the Town of
|
||
Tazewell, north through Richiand’s and southwest toward Bristol. State Route
|
||
16 runs north into West Virginia and south into North Carolina. State Route
|
||
61 connects Tazewell with Rocky Gap to the east. All of these major access
|
||
routes intersect Interstate 81, a primary link between the northeast and
|
||
southeast United States, and Interstate 77 which cuts across the Appalachian
|
||
Mountain Range and connects southern coastal stateswith the Midwest.
|
||
|
||
The Town of Tazewell and Tazewell County are included in the Cumberland
|
||
Plateau Planning District, which is comprised of four counties: Buchanan,
|
||
Dickenson, Russell and Tazewell. The counties and selected towns within
|
||
the Planning District, including their respective populations (2013 Census)
|
||
areas follows:
|
||
|
||
COUNTIES IN THE PLANNING DISTRICT POPULATION
|
||
Dickenson 15,486
|
||
Buchanan 23,596
|
||
Russell 28,264
|
||
Tazewell 44,103
|
||
TOWNS IN THE PLANNING DISTRICT POPULATION
|
||
Bluefield 5,392
|
||
Richlands 5.671
|
||
Tazewell 4,627
|
||
Lebanon 3,424
|
||
Grundy 1,021
|
||
Clintwood 1,383
|
||
Honaker 1,449
|
||
Cedar Bluff 1,137
|
||
Pocahontas 391
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010-2013
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
Page 3
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
I N T R O D U C T I O N
|
||
Page 4
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLANNING AREAS AND FACTORS As the county seat for Tazewell County, the Town of Tazewell s e r v e s as a
|
||
center for a diverse mix of employment, recreational, community,
|
||
institutional, and commercial activities. The trade area for Tazewell is
|
||
primarily confined to the central portion of the County. For purposes of
|
||
presentation, the Planning Area Map on the following page identifies four
|
||
general areas of the Town that exhibit distinct land use, man-made and
|
||
natural feature characteristics and development patterns, which present
|
||
the Town with the opportunity for dif ferent forms of community
|
||
development. These opportunities are presented in Section V of the Plan,
|
||
Community Preservation and Development. In addition to the identification
|
||
of the four areas, (North Tazewell, Four-Way, Tazewell/Downtown and
|
||
Dogwood Road/Steels Lane) factors that should be considered by the Town in
|
||
making planning decisions for the future are presented in the following
|
||
narrative and in graphic form on the Planning Factors Map.
|
||
|
||
PLANNING FACTORS The Town of Tazewell p o s s e s s e s a wealth of natural assets that should
|
||
be preserved for the present and future residents of the Town and the
|
||
region. Not only for preservation purposes solely but also as amenities t o
|
||
attract tourists, businesses and future residents, the area’s natural features
|
||
should be protected. In particular, planning for and implementation of
|
||
measures to protect the Clinch River should be considered.
|
||
Development in the
|
||
100-year flood plain should be discouraged in order to protect the river’s
|
||
sensitive aquatic environment. Best Management Practices (BMP’s) should
|
||
be implemented also to minimize the impact of storm water run-off on the
|
||
river. As a means to feature as well as preserve the river, a series of greenways
|
||
and trails should be developed along it in order to provide recreational
|
||
opportunit ies as w e l l as p e d e s t r i a n linkages between the Town’s
|
||
neighborhoods.
|
||
|
||
The corridor along US 19/460 through the Town provides the motorist with
|
||
some of the best scenic vistas in the region. Rolling pastures interspersed
|
||
with hilltop woodlands provide an important visual border between the
|
||
highway, Tazewell and North Tazewell. As such , residential and/or
|
||
commercial development should be minimized along the corridor in order
|
||
to protect the visual quality of the area. In order to protect the corridor’s
|
||
scenic views, adoption of a Parkway Overlay District should be considered
|
||
for inclusion in the Town’s zoning ordinance. Similarly, development along
|
||
the ridges of the town’s highest mountains should be discouraged in order
|
||
to preserve the visual quality of the area and to minimize the cost of
|
||
providing utilities and infrastructure to serve development on steep slopes.
|
||
|
||
PLANNING AREAS AND FACTORS
|
||
|
||
‘As the county seat for Tazewell County, the Town of Tazewell serves asa
|
||
center for a diverse mix of employment, recreational, community,
|
||
institutional, and commercial activities. The trade area for Tazewell is
|
||
primarily confined to the central portion of the County. For purposes of
|
||
presentation, the Planning Area Map on the following page identifies four
|
||
general areas of the Town that exhibit distinct land use, man-made and
|
||
natural feature characteristics and development patterns, which present
|
||
the Town with the opportunity for different forms of community
|
||
development. These opportunities are presented in Section V of the Plan,
|
||
‘Community Preservation and Development. In addition to the identification
|
||
of the four areas, (North Tazewell, Four-Way, Tazewell/Downtown and
|
||
Dogwood Road/Steels Lane) factors that should be considered by the Town in
|
||
making planning decisions for the future are presented in the following
|
||
narrative and in graphic form on the Planning Factors Map.
|
||
|
||
PLANNING FACTORS
|
||
|
||
The Town of Tazewell possesses a wealth of natural assets that should
|
||
be preserved for the present and future residents of the Town and the
|
||
region. Not only for preservation purposes solely but also as amenities to
|
||
attract tourists, businesses and future residents, the area's natural features
|
||
should be protected. In particular, planning for and implementation of
|
||
measures to protect the Clinch River should be considered.
|
||
Development in the
|
||
|
||
100-year flood plain should be discouraged in order to protect the river's
|
||
sensitive aquatic environment. Best Management Practices (BMP’s) should
|
||
be implemented also to minimize the impact of storm water run-off on the
|
||
river. ASa means to feature as well as preserve the river, a series of greenways
|
||
and trails should be developed along it in order to provide recreational
|
||
opportunities as well as pedestrian linkages between the Town's
|
||
neighborhoods.
|
||
|
||
The corridor along US 19/460 through the Town provides the motorist with
|
||
some of the best scenic vistas in the region. Rolling pastures interspersed
|
||
with hilltop woodlands provide an important visual border between the
|
||
highway, Tazewell and North Tazewell. As such, residential and/or
|
||
‘commercial development should be minimized along the corridor in order
|
||
to protect the visual quality of the area. In order to protect the corridor’s
|
||
scenic views, adoption of a Parkway Overlay District should be considered
|
||
for inclusion in the Town's zoning ordinance. Similarly, development along
|
||
the ridges of the town’s highest mountains should be discouraged in order
|
||
to preserve the visual quality of the area and to minimize the cost of
|
||
providing utilities and infrastructure to serve development on steep slopes.
|
||
|
||
Page 4
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Grundy
|
||
|
||
Buchanan
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
Bluefield
|
||
|
||
|
||
Richlands
|
||
|
||
Tazewell
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF
|
||
TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
Bland
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
|
||
Russell
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
Wytheville
|
||
|
||
|
||
Lebanon Saltville
|
||
|
||
Smyth
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
|
||
Marion
|
||
|
||
Wythe
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
Washington
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
Chilhowie Carroll
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bristol
|
||
|
||
|
||
Virginia
|
||
|
||
Abingdon
|
||
Grayson
|
||
County
|
||
|
||
|
||
Independence
|
||
|
||
Tennessee Virginia
|
||
North Carolina
|
||
|
||
|
||
NORTH
|
||
|
||
VIRGINIA REGIONAL LOCATION
|
||
Town of Tazewell, Virginia
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL LOCATION
|
||
Town of Tazewell, Virginia
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLANNING AREAS
|
||
Town of Tazewell, Tazewell County Virginia LEGEND: NORTH TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
FOUR-WAY
|
||
TAZEWELL I DOWNTOWN
|
||
DOGWOOD RD. I STEELE LN.
|
||
NORTH
|
||
|
||
K.. 6USOCIO.?f$,0.C ....o...tiON IUJT()J(...C HLL tUlKI,PC
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLANNING AREAS
|
||
|
||
Town of Tazewell, Tazewell County Virginia
|
||
|
||
DB soars tazeweun
|
||
|
||
HE rourav
|
||
|
||
[i weweu. oownTowN
|
||
|
||
[1 oo awoon ko. /sTEELE LN
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLANNING FACTORS
|
||
Town of Tazewell, Tazewell County Virginia
|
||
|
||
WAREHOUSE I INDUSTRIAL
|
||
PRESERVATION I
|
||
|
||
ADAPTIVE USE
|
||
PARK PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAY
|
||
DEVELOPMENT
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL I
|
||
RETAIL DEVELOPMENT I
|
||
|
||
REDEVELOPMENT
|
||
+---:-"'+- .,. ..,.... RIDGE LlNE
|
||
|
||
PROTECTION
|
||
VIEWSHED
|
||
|
||
PROTECTION
|
||
AGRICULTURAL
|
||
|
||
LAND PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
HISTORICAL/DOWNTOWN
|
||
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
K.. 6USOCIO.?f$,0.C ....o...tiON IUJT()J(...C
|
||
|
||
WAREHOUSE / INDUSTRIAL
|
||
PRESERVATION /
|
||
ADAPTIVE USE
|
||
|
||
PARK PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
PLANNING FACTORS
|
||
|
||
Town of Tazewell, Tazewell County Virginia
|
||
|
||
GREENWAY
|
||
CLINCH RIVER DEVELOPMENT
|
||
PROTECTION
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL /
|
||
RETAIL DEVELOPMENT /
|
||
REDEVELOPMENT
|
||
|
||
KEY GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
_— RIDGE LINE
|
||
PROTECTION
|
||
|
||
VIEWSHED.
|
||
PROTECTION
|
||
|
||
USS
|
||
Be
|
||
|
||
AGRICULTURAL
|
||
LAND PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
HISTORICAL/DOWNTOWN
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
In addition to the river, scenic vistas and ridges, Lincolnshire Pa rk Lake
|
||
should be protected from potential degradation due to development. The
|
||
land surrounding the lake and park, therefore, should be included in the
|
||
Town’s designated Conservation District.
|
||
|
||
|
||
In addition to the natural features of the area, the historic character of the
|
||
Town should be preserved. A Historic Overlay District should be identified
|
||
to protect the commercial, institutional and residential structures in and
|
||
adjoining the Central Business District along Main Street. In addition, an
|
||
Architectural Review Board (ARB) should be established to review
|
||
applications from developers or owners for rehabilitation, construction and
|
||
demolition of buildings in the district. In conjunction with the establishment
|
||
of the ARB, design guidelines should be developed and adopted to provide
|
||
a framework, which can assist the board in reviewing proposed design
|
||
changes in the district.
|
||
|
||
In North Tazewell and the Four-Way section of Town preservation
|
||
opportunities exist through redevelopment and/or adaptive reuse of
|
||
commercial buildings in order to make them economically viable for current
|
||
and future markets for goods and services.
|
||
|
||
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The present Town of Tazewell’s history is reflected in the history of two
|
||
towns, Tazewell, which was originally named Jeffersonville, and North
|
||
Tazewell, which was originally called Kelly or Kelly’s Mills.
|
||
|
||
Main Street 1907
|
||
|
||
TAZEWELL The Town of Jef fe rsonv i l l e
|
||
was establ ished on February
|
||
8, 1801 and served as th e
|
||
seat of county government.
|
||
I t gr e w slowly until t h e
|
||
Fincas t le Turnp ike reached
|
||
the town in 1834. From this
|
||
t ime up to the Civ il War,
|
||
the town grew rap id ly wi th
|
||
n e w h o u s e s , c h u r c h e s ,
|
||
commercial estab l i shments
|
||
and law and medical offices
|
||
Be i ng bu i l t . In 1866, t he
|
||
|
||
town was incorporated as part of the Reconstruct ion of Virg inia’s
|
||
government af ter the Civ i l Wa r.
|
||
|
||
|
||
I N T R O D U C T I O N
|
||
|
||
Page 5
|
||
|
||
In addition to the river, scenic vistas and ridges, Lincolnshire Park Lake
|
||
should be protected from potential degradation due to development. The
|
||
land surrounding the lake and park, therefore, should be included in the
|
||
‘Town's designated Conservation District.
|
||
|
||
In addition to the natural features of the area, the historic character of the
|
||
‘Town should be preserved. A Historic Overlay District should be identified
|
||
to protect the commercial, institutional and residential structures in and
|
||
adjoining the Central Business District along Main Street. In addition, an
|
||
Architectural Review Board (ARB) should be established to review
|
||
applications from developers or owners for rehabilitation, construction and
|
||
demolition of buildings in the district. In conjunction with the establishment
|
||
of the ARB, design guidelines should be developed and adopted to provide
|
||
a framework, which can assist he board in reviewing proposed design
|
||
changes in the district.
|
||
|
||
In North Tazewell and the Four-Way section of Town preservation
|
||
opportunities exist through redevelopment and/or adaptive reuse of
|
||
‘commercial buildings in order to make them economically viable for current
|
||
and future markets for goods and services.
|
||
|
||
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
|
||
|
||
The present Town of Tazewell’s history is reflected in the history of two
|
||
towns, Tazewell, which was originally named Jeffersonville, and North
|
||
Tazewell, which was originally called Kelly or Kelly Mills.
|
||
|
||
TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
The Town of Jeffersonville
|
||
was established on February
|
||
8, 1801 and served asthe
|
||
seat of county government.
|
||
It grew slowly until the
|
||
Fincastle Turnpike reached
|
||
the town in 1834. From this
|
||
time up to the Civil War,
|
||
|
||
the town grew rapidly with
|
||
new houses, churches,
|
||
commercial establishments
|
||
and law and medical offices
|
||
Being built. In 1866, the
|
||
|
||
town wasincorporatedas part of the Reconstruction of Virginia's
|
||
government after the Civil War.
|
||
|
||
‘Main Street 1907
|
||
|
||
Page 5
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Main Street - Today
|
||
|
||
|
||
Because of the County’s name,
|
||
people from outside of the area
|
||
often referred to the town as
|
||
Tazewel l or Tazewel l
|
||
Courthouse, and in 1892 town
|
||
officials agreed to change the
|
||
name from Jeffersonvi l le to
|
||
Tazewell. From the end of the
|
||
Civil War through the early 20th
|
||
|
||
Century, Tazewel l ’s urban
|
||
character was shaped. The town
|
||
continued to develop during this
|
||
period with hotels, banks, and
|
||
other Main Street businesses
|
||
being built after Reconstruction.
|
||
|
||
During this time period, the Town began to develop its public utility and
|
||
transportation infrastructure with telephone service provided in 1896,
|
||
electricity made available in 1899, and streetcar service offered from the
|
||
train depot in North Tazewell to Main Street in Tazewell in 1904.
|
||
From the turn of the twentieth century through the beginning of the twenty-
|
||
first century, Tazewell has undergone changes in response to economic and
|
||
social changes and technological advances. The primary center of commercial/
|
||
industrial activity for the Town has become the Four-Way Section with its car
|
||
dealerships, supermarkets, drug stores, and fast food restaurants. There is also
|
||
an industrial park off of Rt. 61 (Riverside Drive) near the US 19/460 interchange.
|
||
Even with these changes, Tazewell remains proud of its heritage as evidenced
|
||
by its downtown being designated as a Historic District on the National Register
|
||
of Historic Places in March, 2002 (see Historic District Map).
|
||
Main Street has and is continuing to be restored to a historic and recreational
|
||
center for the Town. New restaurants along with live concerts in the Historic
|
||
Mini-Park on Main Street continue to draw thousands every weekend from
|
||
June through September.
|
||
|
||
NORTH TAZEWELL The industrial area along the Clinch River was known for years as Kelly or
|
||
Kelly’s Mills. It developed as an area that relied upon the river as a source
|
||
of power for gristmills, a foundry, a woolen mill and a woodworking plant.
|
||
|
||
|
||
I N T R O D U C T I O N
|
||
Page 6
|
||
|
||
Because of the Countys name,
|
||
people from outside of the area
|
||
often referred to the town as
|
||
Tazewell or Tazewell
|
||
Courthouse, and in 1892 town
|
||
officials agreed to change the
|
||
name from Jeffersonville to
|
||
Tazewell. From the end of the
|
||
Civil War through the early 20"
|
||
Century, Tazewell’s urban
|
||
character was shaped. The town
|
||
continued to develop during this
|
||
period with hotels, banks, and
|
||
other Main Street businesses
|
||
being built after Reconstruction.
|
||
|
||
Main Street - Today
|
||
|
||
During this time period, the Town began to develop its public utility and
|
||
transportation infrastructure with telephone service provided in 1896,
|
||
electricity made available in 1899, and streetcar service offered from the
|
||
train depot in North Tazewell to Main Street in Tazewell in 1904.
|
||
|
||
From the turn of the twentieth century through the beginning of the twenty-
|
||
first century, Tazewell has undergone changes in response to economic and
|
||
social changes and technological advances. The primary center of commercial!
|
||
industrial activity for the Town has become the Four-Way Section with its car
|
||
dealerships, supermarkets, drug stores, and fast food restaurants. There is also
|
||
an industrial park off of Rt. 61 (Riverside Drive) near the US 19/460 interchange.
|
||
Even with these changes, Tazewell remains proud of its heritage as evidenced
|
||
by its downtown being designated as a Historic District on the National Register
|
||
of Historic Places in March, 2002 (see Historic District Map).
|
||
|
||
Main Street has and is continuing to be restored to a historic and recreational
|
||
center for the Town. New restaurants along with live concerts in the Historic
|
||
Mini-Park on Main Street continue to draw thousands every weekend from
|
||
June through September.
|
||
|
||
NORTH TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
The industrial area along the Clinch River was known for years as Kelly or
|
||
Kelly's Mills. It developed as an area that relied upon the river as a source
|
||
of power for gristmills, a foundry, a woolen mill and a woodworking plant.
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
Page 6
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
HISTORIC DISTRICT MAP
|
||
/ LEGEND
|
||
|
||
Historic District Boundary
|
||
01. Dr. C.W Greever House (c.1876)
|
||
02. Old Tazewell High School (1931)
|
||
03. Dr. J.R. Gildersleeve House (1877)
|
||
04. Clinch Valley News Building (c.1878)
|
||
05. Tazewell National Bank (1901)
|
||
06. Spotts-Stras Building (1899)
|
||
07. Hawkins Pharmacy (1902)
|
||
08. Graham Building (1902)
|
||
09. Peery & St. Clair Building (1903)
|
||
10. The Bank of Clinch Valley (c.1900)
|
||
11. Harrison & Gillespie Building (c.1900)
|
||
12. Tazewell County Courthouse (1874)
|
||
13. Tazewell Post Office (1936)
|
||
14. Dr. W.l. Painter House (c.1899)
|
||
15. Tazewell Masonic Lodge (1931)
|
||
16. Greever & Gillespie Law Ofc Bldg (1897)
|
||
17. H.W. Pobst Jewelry Building (1887)
|
||
18. Kilgore Ford Building (c.1930)
|
||
19. Old Jail Building (c.1832)
|
||
20. Telephone Building (c.1894)
|
||
21. Witten Building (1914)
|
||
22. Clinch Valley Bank (c.1889)
|
||
23. J.A. Greever Building (1914)
|
||
24. Main Street Methodist Church (1913)
|
||
25. Dr. J.T. Cooley House (c. 1900)
|
||
26. Judge Boyer House (1905)
|
||
27. Tazewell Presbyterian Church (1924) Original Land Uses
|
||
|
||
Residence
|
||
Commercial/Office
|
||
|
||
Churches/Lodges
|
||
Public/Semi-public
|
||
Non-Contributing
|
||
|
||
Structures
|
||
25 0 50 100 200 300
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
HISTORIC DISTRICT MAP
|
||
|
||
Historic District Boundary
|
||
|
||
01. Dr. C.W Greever House (c.1876)
|
||
02 Old Tazewell High School (1931)
|
||
|
||
03. Dr. J.R. Gildersleeve House (1877)
|
||
|
||
04. Clinch Valley News Building (.1878)
|
||
05. TazewellNational Bank (1901)
|
||
|
||
08. Spotts-Stras Building (1899)
|
||
|
||
07. Hawkins Pharmacy (1902)
|
||
|
||
08. Graham Building (1902)
|
||
|
||
09. Peery & St. Clair Building (1903)
|
||
|
||
10. The Bank of Clinch Valley (c.1900)
|
||
|
||
11. Harrison & Gillespie Building (c.1900)
|
||
12. TazewellCounty Courthouse (1874)
|
||
13. Tazewell Post Office (1936)
|
||
|
||
14. Dr. W.1. Painter House (c.1899)
|
||
|
||
15. Tazewell Masonic Lodge (1931)
|
||
|
||
16. Greever & Gillespie Law Ofe Bldg (1897)
|
||
17. H.W. Pobst Jewelry Building (1887)
|
||
18. Kilgore Ford Building (c.1930)
|
||
|
||
19. Old Jail Building (¢.1832)
|
||
|
||
20. Telephone Buiding (c. 1894)
|
||
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
|
||
21. Witten Building (1914)
|
||
|
||
22. Clinch Valley Bank (c.1889)
|
||
|
||
23. J.A. Greever Building (1914)
|
||
|
||
24. Main Street Methodist Church (1913)
|
||
25. Dr. J.T.Cooley House (c. 1900)
|
||
|
||
26. Judge Boyer House (1905)
|
||
|
||
27. TazewellPresbyterian Church (1924)
|
||
|
||
Original Land Uses
|
||
|
||
(1) Residence
|
||
|
||
Commercial/Office
|
||
|
||
Churches/Lodges
|
||
|
||
Public/Semi-public
|
||
|
||
Non-Contributing
|
||
Structures
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Page 7
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Later, the Norfolk & Western
|
||
Railroad laid a rail line along the
|
||
river and built a station to serve
|
||
businesses and travelers in the
|
||
area.
|
||
In 1894, the Town of North
|
||
Tazewell was incorporated. It
|
||
continued to grow along the
|
||
Clinch River as w arehouses, a
|
||
feed mixing plant, a meat packing
|
||
plant, and a bottling plant were
|
||
built. Residences were also built
|
||
along the river and up a ridge
|
||
north of the river. In 1963, North
|
||
Tazewell merged with the Town
|
||
|
||
|
||
North Tazewell Train Station
|
||
|
||
of Tazewell due in part because Tazewell’s water and sanitary sewage systems
|
||
were already serving North Tazewell.6 The currently vacant historic train depot
|
||
in North Tazewell once served as one of the hubs of the community.
|
||
Warehouses adjacent to the depot are beginning to be redeveloped showing
|
||
that new life can be brought to the area.
|
||
|
||
|
||
.
|
||
|
||
Later, the Norfolk & Western
|
||
Railroad laid a rail line along the
|
||
river and built a station to serve
|
||
businesses and travelers in the
|
||
area,
|
||
|
||
In 1894, the Town of North
|
||
‘Tazewell was incorporated. It
|
||
continued to grow along the
|
||
Clinch River as warehouses, a
|
||
feed mixing plant, a meat packing
|
||
plant, and a bottling plant were
|
||
built. Residences were also built
|
||
along the river and up a ridge
|
||
north of the river. In 1963, North
|
||
Tazewell merged with the Town
|
||
|
||
North Tazewell Train Station
|
||
|
||
of Tazewell due in part because Tazewell's water and sanitary sewage systems
|
||
were already serving North Tazewell.’ The currently vacant historic train depot
|
||
in North Tazewell once servedas one of the hubs of the community.
|
||
Warehouses adjacent to the depot are beginning to be redeveloped showing
|
||
that new life can be brought to the area.
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
|
||
Page 7
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
I N T R O D U C T I O N
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
BACKGROUND ANALYSIS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
BACKGROUND ANALYSIS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Page 8
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
PHYSIOGRAPHY
|
||
The physiography of an area is a description of its geography and other
|
||
natural phenomena. Each physiographic province in Virginia has a unique
|
||
land form and water supply as well as a common climate, soil, and vegetation,
|
||
all of which differ from other physiographic provinces.
|
||
Tazewell County and the
|
||
Town of Tazewell l ie
|
||
within the Valley and
|
||
Ridge province, which is
|
||
characterized as having
|
||
long l inear r idges
|
||
separated by l inear
|
||
val leys with a t rel l is
|
||
drainage pattern. In the
|
||
val leys, the soi ls are
|
||
mainly moderate or
|
||
deep. Shale, siltstone,
|
||
limestone, and dolomite
|
||
underlie them. On the
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s Valleys & Ridges
|
||
|
||
ridges, the soils are shallow too deep with shale, siltstone, and sandstone
|
||
underlying them. TOPOGRAPHY As noted above, ridges and valleys characterize the topography of the Town.
|
||
Elevations in the Town range from approximately 2,400 feet along the Clinch
|
||
River to 2,800 feet along Whitley Ridge north of the town and along Rich
|
||
Mountain south of the town. Within the town limits there are a number of
|
||
areas with slopes exceeding 25 percent (25%). These slopes along with
|
||
other natural features are shown on the Environmental Constraints Map.
|
||
These steep slopes are especially prone to erosion, which creates natural
|
||
constraints on their development. The engineering and construction
|
||
requirements for providing sound, safe structures on these slopes further
|
||
hinder their development.
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
|
||
PHYSIOGRAPHY
|
||
|
||
The physiography of an areais a description of its geography and other
|
||
natural phenomena. Each physiographic province in Virginia has unique
|
||
land form and water supply as well as a common climate, soil, and vegetation,
|
||
all of which differ from other physiographic provinces.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell County and the
|
||
Town of Tazewell lie
|
||
within the Valley and
|
||
Ridge province, which is
|
||
characterized as having
|
||
long linear ridges
|
||
separated by linear
|
||
valleys with a trellis
|
||
drainage pattern. In the
|
||
valleys, the soils are
|
||
mainly moderate or
|
||
deep. Shale, siltstone,
|
||
|
||
limestone, and dolomite Tazewell’s Valleys & Ridges
|
||
underlie them. On the
|
||
|
||
ridges, the soils are shallow too deep with shale, siltstone, and sandstone
|
||
underlying them.
|
||
|
||
TOPOGRAPHY
|
||
|
||
Asnoted above, ridges and valleys characterize the topography of the Town.
|
||
Elevations in the Town range from approximately 2,400 feet along the Clinch
|
||
River to 2,800 feet along Whitley Ridge north of the town and along Rich
|
||
Mountain south of the town. Within the town limits there are a number of
|
||
areas with slopes exceeding 25 percent (25%). These slopes along with
|
||
other natural features are shown on the Environmental Constraints Map.
|
||
These steep slopes are especially prone to erosion, which creates natural
|
||
constraints on their development. The engineering and construction
|
||
requirements for providing sound, safe structures on these slopes further
|
||
hinder their development.
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
|
||
Page 8
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Page 9
|
||
|
||
SOILS AND SOIL SUITABILITY The identification and location of various soil types determines what
|
||
limitations or special capabilities various soils might have, and what the
|
||
effects of development on a particular soil type might be. Soil type influences
|
||
building foundation strength, drainage, erodibility, and the suitability of septic
|
||
tank wastewater disposal systems. All of these are important when
|
||
considering the nature and extent of development that should occur within
|
||
an area.
|
||
|
||
The most common soils found in the area are of the Westmoreland-
|
||
Poplimento-Berks Series and the Frederick-Carbo-Bland Series. These soils
|
||
range from gently sloping to very steep, well drained, moderately deep to
|
||
very deep soils. These soils are found on summits, shoulders, back slopes
|
||
and some foot slopes. The soils are primarily suited for cropland, pastures,
|
||
and woodlands. They range in building site development potential from
|
||
moderately well suited to poorly suited or not suited at all. The following
|
||
table summarizes several of the development limitations of specific common
|
||
soils found within the area:
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.1 GENERAL SOIL SUITABILITY
|
||
DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS ON:
|
||
|
||
SOIL NAME % SLOPE
|
||
RANGE
|
||
|
||
DWELLINGS
|
||
WITHOUT
|
||
|
||
BASEMENTS
|
||
DWELLINGS
|
||
|
||
WITH
|
||
BASEMENTS
|
||
|
||
SMALL
|
||
COMMERCIAL
|
||
|
||
BUILDINGS
|
||
LOCAL ROADS
|
||
AND STREETS
|
||
|
||
Bland-Rock outcrop
|
||
complex 15-50% Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
|
||
Frederick silt loam,
|
||
Karst 7-25% Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
|
||
Westmoreland-
|
||
Poplimento-Berks 25-65% Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
|
||
Carbo-Rock outcrop 25-65% Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
|
||
Melvin silt loam 0-2% Severe:
|
||
flooding,
|
||
wetness
|
||
|
||
Severe:
|
||
flooding,
|
||
wetness
|
||
|
||
Severe:
|
||
flooding,
|
||
wetness
|
||
|
||
Severe:
|
||
flooding,
|
||
wetness
|
||
|
||
Frederick gravelly silt
|
||
loam 7-25% Severe: shrink-
|
||
|
||
swell
|
||
Severe: shrink-
|
||
|
||
swell
|
||
Severe: shrink-
|
||
|
||
swell
|
||
Severe: shrink-
|
||
|
||
swell
|
||
|
||
Source: USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service
|
||
|
||
SOILS AND SOIL SUITABILITY
|
||
|
||
The identification and location of various soil types determines what
|
||
limitations or special capabilities various soils might have, and what the
|
||
effects of development on a particular soil type might be. Soil ype influences
|
||
building foundation strength, drainage, erodibility, and the suitability of septic
|
||
tank wastewater disposal systems. All of these are important when
|
||
considering the nature and extent of development that should ocour within
|
||
anarea.
|
||
|
||
The most common soils found in the area are of the Westmoreland-
|
||
Poplimento-Berks Series and the Frederick-Carbo-Bland Series. These soils
|
||
range from gently sloping to very steep, well drained, moderately deep to
|
||
very deep soils. These soils are found on summits, shoulders, back slopes
|
||
and some foot slopes. The soils are primarily suited for cropland, pastures,
|
||
and woodlands. They range in building site development potential from
|
||
moderately well suited to poorly suited or not suited at all. The following
|
||
table summarizes several of the development limitations of specific common
|
||
soils found within the area:
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.1 GENERAL SOIL SUITABILITY
|
||
DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS ON:
|
||
Dwewines | OWELLINGS | SMALL
|
||
SOIL NAME, Stee | wiTHOUT, Witt COMMERCIAL | LOCALROADS
|
||
BASEMENTS | BASEMENTS | BUILDINGS
|
||
Bland-Rock outcrop
|
||
panes 15-50% Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
Frederick sit loam, 7.25% Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
Karst
|
||
pene Bes 25-65% Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
Carbo-Rock outerop 25-65% Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
Severe Severe Severe Severe
|
||
Melvin silt loam 02% flooding, flooding, flooding, flooding,
|
||
wet wetne: wetn wetne:
|
||
Frederick gravelly silt 7.25% | Severe: shrink- | Severe: shrink: | Severe: shrink- | Severe: shrink:
|
||
foam ‘well swell swell swell
|
||
|
||
Source: USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
|
||
Page 9
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL. VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
NORTH
|
||
(:
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
Steep Slopes (25% +)
|
||
100 Year Floodplain
|
||
Water Features
|
||
Sinkholes
|
||
|
||
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL. VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
Gs Steep Slopes (25% +)
|
||
100 Year Floodplain
|
||
a Water Features
|
||
|
||
@® Sinkholes
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
Page 10
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
SINKHOLES Sinkholes are natural depressions in the land caused by settling of the earth
|
||
underneath, which surface water can enter the ground and come in contact
|
||
with subsurface water. The Town has several areas with sinkholes as
|
||
illustrated on the Environmental Constraints Map. There are three potential
|
||
problems associated with development in areas where sinkholes are present:
|
||
surface collapse or subsidence, sinkhole flooding , and groundwater pollution.
|
||
Due to these problems, development should be discouraged in these areas.
|
||
|
||
DRAINAGE The Town is within of the Clinch River Sub-watershed, which is part of the
|
||
Upper Tennessee River Watershed. This watershed includes three major
|
||
tributaries—the Clinch, Holston and Powell Rivers. The Clinch originates
|
||
east of the Town where it flows through it and parts of Tazewell, Scott,
|
||
Wise and Lee Counties until it meets the Powell River at Norris Run in
|
||
Tennessee. The Clinch River is nearly 1,773 miles long , and its watershed
|
||
drains over 800,000 acres. The Nature Conservancy has named the Clinch
|
||
as one of the most biologically rich rivers in the country. It is home to 29
|
||
rare freshwater mussel and 19 rare fish species; many found nowhere else
|
||
in the world. Because of its rich biodiversity, the Town should implement
|
||
measures that protect the Clinch from degradation due to sedimentation
|
||
and non-point and point source pollution through storm water management
|
||
Best Management Practices (BMP’s).
|
||
|
||
FLOODPLAINS Floodplains are defined as areas that have a 100 percent probability of
|
||
being flooded over a 100-year time period. In Tazewell, the major floodplains
|
||
are located along the Clinch River and its tributaries and are identified on
|
||
the Environmental Constraints Map. This map illustrates the approximate
|
||
flood boundaries and is intended for general planning purposes only. For
|
||
detailed site and engineering purposes, the Flood Insurance Rate Maps
|
||
prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) should be
|
||
consulted. While generally accurate, these maps do not necessarily identify
|
||
all areas subject to flooding, such as along smaller drainage ways or in recently
|
||
urbanized areas where storm water management i s deficient.
|
||
|
||
Floodplains are valuable resources that provide, in addition to flood passage,
|
||
agricultural land, recreational land, and wildlife habitat. In addition, they
|
||
provide groundwater recharge and pollution protection. As such, the Plan
|
||
recommends protecting currently undeveloped floodplains from incompatible
|
||
uses.
|
||
|
||
SINKHOLES
|
||
|
||
Sinkholes are natural depressions in the land caused by settling of the earth
|
||
underneath, which surface water can enter the ground and come in contact
|
||
with subsurface water. The Town has several areas with sinkholes as
|
||
illustrated on the Environmental Constraints Map. There are three potential
|
||
problems associated with development in areas where sinkholes are present:
|
||
surface collapse or subsidence, sinkhole flooding, and groundwater pollution.
|
||
Due to these problems, development should be discouraged in these areas,
|
||
|
||
DRAINAGE
|
||
|
||
The Townis within of the Clinch River Sub-watershed, which is part of the
|
||
Upper Tennessee River Watershed. This watershed includes three major
|
||
tributaries—the Clinch, Holston and Powell Rivers. The Clinch originates
|
||
east of the Town where it flows through it and parts of Tazewell, Scott,
|
||
Wise and Lee Counties until it meets the Powell River at Norris Run
|
||
Tennessee. The Clinch River is nearly 1,773 miles long, and its watershed
|
||
drains over 800,000 acres. The Nature Conservancy has named the Clinch
|
||
as one of the most biologically rich rivers in the country. It is home to 29
|
||
rare freshwater mussel and 19 rare fish species; many found nowhere else
|
||
in the world. Because of its rich biodiversity, the Town should implement
|
||
measures that protect the Clinch from degradation due to sedimentation
|
||
and non-point and point source pollution through storm water management
|
||
Best Management Practices (BMP'S).
|
||
|
||
FLOODPLAINS
|
||
|
||
Floodplains are defined as areas that have a 100 percent probability of
|
||
being flooded over a 100-year time period. In Tazewell, the major floodplains
|
||
are located along the Clinch River and its tributaries and are identified on
|
||
the Environmental Constraints Map. This map illustrates the approximate
|
||
flood boundaries and is intended for general planning purposes only. For
|
||
detailed site and engineering purposes, the Flood Insurance Rate Maps
|
||
prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) should be
|
||
consulted. While generally accurate, these maps do not necessarily identify
|
||
all areas subject to flooding, suchas along smaller drainage ways or in recently
|
||
urbanized areas where storm water management is deficient.
|
||
|
||
Floodplains are valuable resources that provide, in addition to flood passage,
|
||
agricultural land, recreational land, and wildlife habitat. In addition, they
|
||
provide groundwater recharge and pollution protection. As such, the Plan
|
||
recommends protecting currently undeveloped floodplains from incompatible
|
||
uses.
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
|
||
Page 10
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES
|
||
Page 11
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
CLIMATE Tazewell enjoys a temperate climate with cold, but not extreme winters
|
||
and generally warm summers. In the summer, the average temperature is
|
||
65.3º F and the average daily maximum temperature i s 76.3º F. In the
|
||
winter, the average temperature is 29.3º F and the average minimum
|
||
temperature is 18.9º F.
|
||
|
||
The total annual precipitation is approximately 44.33 inches. Of this, about
|
||
20.42 inches or 46 percent, usually falls during the growing season of May
|
||
through September.
|
||
|
||
The average seasonal snowfall is about 52.5 inches. On average, 33 days
|
||
of the year have at least one inch of snow on the ground, but this number
|
||
of days varies from year to year.
|
||
|
||
The average relative humidity in mid-afternoon is about 60 percent. Humidity
|
||
is higher at night, and the average at dawn is about 83 percent. The prevailing
|
||
wind is from the southwest.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
CLIMATE
|
||
|
||
Tazewell enjoys a temperate climate with cold, but not extreme winters
|
||
and generally warm summers. In the summer, the average temperature is
|
||
65.3° F and the average daily maximum temperature is 76.3° F. In the
|
||
winter, the average temperature is 29.3° F and the average minimum
|
||
temperature is 18.9° F
|
||
|
||
The total annual precipitation is approximately 44.33 inches. Of this, about
|
||
20.42 inches or 46 percent, usually falls during the growing season of May
|
||
through September.
|
||
|
||
The average seasonal snowfall is about 52.5 inches. On average, 33 days
|
||
of the year have at least one inch of snow on the ground, but this number
|
||
of days varies from year to year.
|
||
|
||
‘The average relative humidity in mid-afternoon is about 60 percent. Humidity
|
||
ishigher at night, and the average at dawn is about 83 percent. The prevailing
|
||
wind is from the southwest.
|
||
|
||
NATURAL FEATURES.
|
||
|
||
— Page 11
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
Page 12
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
INTRODUCTION This chapter presents an assessment of existing land use conditions and
|
||
changes that have occurred since the Town’s previous comprehensive plan
|
||
was prepared by the Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission.
|
||
|
||
The first part of the chapter focuses on changes in the amount and locations
|
||
of various land uses by major categories such as residential, c o m m e r c i a l ,
|
||
industrial, public and semi-public, and roads and rights-of-way. The end of
|
||
the chapter presents future implications for residential and commercial uses
|
||
within the town.
|
||
|
||
HOW WE USE OUR LAND
|
||
• Almost 63% of the town’s land area, approximately 2,600 acres, are still
|
||
|
||
undeveloped.
|
||
Residential development is the largest user of land in Tazewell with
|
||
approximately 700 acres, or 17% of the total town land area. This
|
||
amount increased by 31.5% since the previous comprehensive plan was
|
||
completed in 1975.
|
||
Residential development h a s continued to expand along the frontage of
|
||
roadways within the town. In particular, development has occurred along
|
||
Dogwood Road, Steele’s Lane, Marion Avenue and Dial Rock Road.
|
||
The amount of acreage dedicated to mobile homes has decreased and the
|
||
amount of multi-family housing has increased since the previous
|
||
comprehensive plan was completed.
|
||
Roads and rights-of-ways constitute the second highest amount of
|
||
developed acreage within the town with 382 acres or approximately
|
||
9% of the total town land area.
|
||
Public/semi-public uses have increased from 1975. Currently, these
|
||
uses compromise approximately 7% of the total town area versus 3%
|
||
of the town area in 1975.
|
||
Commercial and industrial uses combined only account for
|
||
approximately 4% of the town’s total land area.
|
||
Although the town has a considerable amount of underdeveloped land,
|
||
only a small percentage of this land is suitable for development based
|
||
upon environmental constraints such as soil suitability, steep slopes,
|
||
sinkholes, land in the –year floodplain, and wetlands.
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
This chapter presents an assessment of existing land use conditions and
|
||
changes thathave occurred since the Town's previous comprehensive plan
|
||
was prepared by the Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission.
|
||
|
||
The first partof the chapter focuses on changes in the amount and locations
|
||
of various land uses by major categories such as residential, commercial,
|
||
industrial, public and semi-public, and roads and rights-of-way. The end of
|
||
the chapter presents future implications for residential and commercial uses
|
||
within the town.
|
||
|
||
HOW WEUSE OUR LAND
|
||
|
||
Almost 63% of the town’s land area, approximately 2,600 acres, are still
|
||
undeveloped.
|
||
|
||
Residential developments the largest user of land in Tazewell with
|
||
approximately 700 acres, or 17% of the total town land area. This
|
||
amount increased by 31.5% since the previous comprehensive plan was
|
||
completed in 1975.
|
||
|
||
Residential development has continued to expand along the frontage of
|
||
roadways within the town. In particular, development has occurred along
|
||
Dogwood Road, Steele's Lane, Marion Avenue and Dial Rock Road.
|
||
|
||
‘The amount of acreage dedicated to mobile homes has decreased and the
|
||
amount of multi-family housing has increased since the previous
|
||
comprehensive plan was completed.
|
||
|
||
Roads and rights-of-ways constitute the second highest amount of
|
||
developed acreage within the town with 382 acres or approximately
|
||
9% of the total town land area.
|
||
|
||
Public/semi-public uses have increased from 1975. Currently, these
|
||
uses compromise approximately 7% of the total town area versus 3%
|
||
of the town area in 1975.
|
||
|
||
Commercial and industrial uses combined only account for
|
||
approximately 4% of the town's total land area
|
||
|
||
Although the town has a considerable amount of underdeveloped land,
|
||
only a small percentage of this land is suitable for development based
|
||
upon environmental constraints such as soil suitability, steep slopes,
|
||
sinkholes, land in the -year floodplain, and wetlands.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
Page 13
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE This section of the chapter presents a summary of the existing land uses
|
||
within Tazewell and highlights significant changes that have occurred over
|
||
the last two decades. Tazewell’s current land use development patterns
|
||
are illustrated on the Existing Land Use Map. The map divides land use
|
||
activities into five major categories, which include residential; commercial;
|
||
public/semi-public; industrial; and roads/rights-of way. Information on this
|
||
map exhibit was compiled from field surveys conducted by the town’s
|
||
planning consultant in May and June 2002. All property lines are based
|
||
upon Tazewell County tax maps and subdivision plats recorded at the time
|
||
of the survey.
|
||
|
||
For purposes of identifying the various land uses within the town, the
|
||
following definitions are employed: RESIDENTIAL USES
|
||
|
||
1. Single-Family Residential includes detached dwellings, other than
|
||
manufactured homes, on separate lots or parcels designed for and
|
||
occupied by one family only.
|
||
|
||
2. Multi-Family Residential includes attached dwelling units that are
|
||
part of structures containing two or more units, such as townhouses,
|
||
duplexes, multiplexes, apartments and group quarters.
|
||
|
||
3. Manufactured Homes include pre-fabricated detached dwellings
|
||
that are located on individual lots and in manufactured home parks. COMMERCIAL USES
|
||
|
||
1. General Commercial includes business establishments such as auto
|
||
repair, general repair, wholesaling, agricultural supply, mini-storage,
|
||
fuel distribution and other related uses.
|
||
|
||
2. Retail/Service includes business establishments that provide goods
|
||
and services to the general public. Examples of retail/service
|
||
establishments include banks, restaurants, grocery stores,
|
||
convenience stores, clothing stores, non-professional services, etc.
|
||
|
||
3. Office/Business/Professional Services includes business
|
||
establishments such as private office buildings, business services
|
||
such as bookkeeping and accounting, and professional services
|
||
such as physicians, dentists, optometrists, a t t o r n e y s ,
|
||
engineers, architects, and certified public accountants.
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
|
||
This section of the chapter presents a summary of the existing land uses
|
||
within Tazewell and highlights significant changes that have occurred over
|
||
the lasttwo decades. Tazewell’s current land use development patterns
|
||
are illustrated on the Existing Land Use Map. The map divides land use
|
||
activities into five major categories, which include residential; commercial;
|
||
public/semi-public; industrial; and roadsirights-of way. Information on this
|
||
map exhibit was compiled from field surveys conducted by the town’s
|
||
planning consultant in May and June 2002. All property lines are based
|
||
upon Tazewell County tax maps and subdivision plats recorded at the time
|
||
of the survey.
|
||
|
||
For purposes of identifying the various and uses within the town, the
|
||
following definitions are employed:
|
||
|
||
RESIDENTIAL USES
|
||
|
||
1. Single-Family Residential includes detached dwellings, other than
|
||
manufactured homes, on separate lots or parcels designed for and
|
||
occupied by one family only.
|
||
|
||
2 Multi-Family Residential includes attached dwelling units that are
|
||
part of structures containing two or more units, such as townhouses,
|
||
duplexes, multiplexes, apartments and group quarters.
|
||
|
||
3. Manufactured Homes include pre-fabricated detached dwellings
|
||
that are located on individual lots and in manufactured home parks.
|
||
|
||
COMMERCIAL USES
|
||
|
||
1 General Commercial includes business establishments such as auto
|
||
repair, general repair, wholesaling, agricultural supply, mini-storage,
|
||
fuel distribution and other related uses.
|
||
|
||
2, Retail/Service includes business establishments that provide goods
|
||
and services to the general public. Examples of retail/service
|
||
establishments include banks, restaurants, grocery stores,
|
||
‘convenience stores, clothing stores, non-professional services, etc.
|
||
|
||
3. Office/Business/Professional Services includes business
|
||
establishments such as private office buildings, business services
|
||
such as bookkeeping and accounting, and professional services.
|
||
such as physicians, dentists, optometrists, attorneys,
|
||
engineers, architects, and certified public accountants.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Residential
|
||
SINGLE FAMILY
|
||
|
||
MOBILE HOME
|
||
MULTI-FAMILY
|
||
|
||
Commercial
|
||
RETAIL & SERVICE
|
||
GENERAL COMMERCIAL
|
||
BUSINESS I PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
|
||
|
||
Industrial
|
||
INDUSTRIAL
|
||
|
||
Public & Semi-Public
|
||
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
PLACES OF WORSHIP
|
||
PARKS & RECREATION
|
||
|
||
VACANT
|
||
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
Land Use Classifications
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
Land Use Classifications
|
||
|
||
Residential
|
||
|
||
sce ramuy
|
||
[BB oats ome
|
||
EB uneaney
|
||
|
||
‘Commercial
|
||
|
||
GHB rear service
|
||
|
||
HB exert conmenciat
|
||
[EB cusiness) proressionat service
|
||
|
||
Industrial
|
||
B® wousraa.
|
||
|
||
Public & Semi-Public
|
||
|
||
GB comunrry racumes
|
||
|
||
HEB rices oF worst
|
||
Grass necrearion
|
||
|
||
TD vacant
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE Page 14
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
INDUSTRIAL USES
|
||
1. Industrial includes general manufacturing, processing operations, and
|
||
|
||
fabrication/assembly of raw materials for the production of finished
|
||
goods. It also includes functions such as warehousing, bulk storage,
|
||
distribution and similar activities. Industrial uses are those that create
|
||
noise, dust, smoke or other nuisances generally incompatible with other
|
||
land uses. PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC USES
|
||
|
||
1. Community Facilities includes public or semi-public uses associated
|
||
with government and institutional uses. These include such uses as
|
||
municipal buildings, schools, community hospitals, fairgrounds, public
|
||
utilities, water and wastewater treatment plants, and other related
|
||
uses.
|
||
|
||
2. Places of Worship/Cemeteries/Lodges include all places of worship
|
||
such as churches, s y n a g o g u e s , temples, and mosques as well as
|
||
burial grounds; and fraternal organization lodges.
|
||
|
||
3. Parks and Recreation includes all lands, water, facilities and buildings
|
||
devoted to parks and recreation areas. Examples include town/
|
||
privately owned and/or operated parks, recreation centers and trail
|
||
systems. OTHER LAND USES
|
||
|
||
1. Roads and Rights-of-Way include all publicly maintained roads and
|
||
rights-of-way comprising the area’s vehicular transportation system. OPEN USES
|
||
|
||
1. Vacant and Agricultural includes all other open uses such as cropland,
|
||
pastures, forests, streams, rivers, and vacant lots. SUMMARY OF EXISTING LAND USES Table 2.2 presents a summary of the approximate acreage contained in the
|
||
|
||
above mentioned land use categories. These acreage figures have been
|
||
calculated based upon plan meter readings taken from the Tazewell County
|
||
parcel map at a scale of 1" = 500’.
|
||
|
||
As illustrated in the table, the largest percentage of land dedicated to any of
|
||
the developed land categories is for residential land uses, which account for
|
||
approximately 688 acres, or 16.9% of the town’s total land area. Land use
|
||
estimates from the town’s previous comprehensive plan indicated that the
|
||
total acreage dedicated to residential land uses was approximately 523 acres.
|
||
|
||
INDUSTRIAL USES
|
||
|
||
1, Industrial includes general manufacturing, processing operations, and
|
||
fabricationfassembly of raw materials for the production of finished
|
||
goods. It also includes functions such as warehousing, bulk storage,
|
||
distribution and similar activities. Industrial uses are those that create
|
||
noise, dust, smoke or other nuisances generally incompatible with other
|
||
land uses
|
||
|
||
PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC USES
|
||
|
||
1 Community Facilities includes public or semi-public uses associated
|
||
with government and institutional uses. These include such uses as
|
||
municipal buildings, schools, community hospitals, fairgrounds, public
|
||
utilities, water and wastewater treatment plants, and other related
|
||
uses.
|
||
|
||
2 Places of Worship/Cemeteries/Lodges include all places of worship
|
||
‘suchas churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques as well as.
|
||
burial grounds; and fraternal organization lodges.
|
||
|
||
3. Parks and Recreation includes all lands, water, facilities and buildings
|
||
|
||
devoted to parks and recreation areas. Examples include town/
|
||
privately owned and/or operated parks, recreation centers and trail
|
||
|
||
systems.
|
||
OTHER LAND USES
|
||
1. Roads and Rights-of- Way include all publicly maintained roads and
|
||
|
||
rights-of-way comprising the area's vehicular transportation system.
|
||
|
||
OPEN USES
|
||
4 Vacant and Agricultural includes all other open uses such as cropland,
|
||
|
||
pastures, forests, streams, rivers, and vacant lots.
|
||
SUMMARY OF EXISTING LAND USES
|
||
|
||
Table 2.2 presents a summary of the approximate acreage contained in the
|
||
above mentioned land use categories. These acreage figures have been
|
||
calculated based upon plan meter readings taken from the Tazewell County
|
||
parcel map at a scale of 1" = 500"
|
||
|
||
Asillustrated in the table, the largest percentage of land dedicated to any of
|
||
the developed land categories is for residential land uses, which account for
|
||
approximately 688 acres, or 16.9% of the town’s total land area. Land use
|
||
estimates from the town's previous comprehensive plan indicated that the
|
||
total acreage dedicated to residential land uses was approximately 523 acres.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Page 15
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
This suggests that the amount of land used for residential purposes in
|
||
Tazewell has increased by approximately one-third over the past two decades. Two features characterize Tazewell’s residential land use pattern. The first
|
||
is that residential development now extends along the frontage of nearly
|
||
the town’s entire historical road network. This is typical of growth within a
|
||
community since development along existing roadways can generally be
|
||
accomplished quicker an less expensively compared with the need for
|
||
constructing new subdivision roadways and providing public utilities to access
|
||
back land parcels. As the amount of existing road frontage available for
|
||
residential development has decreased, however, new subdivisions have
|
||
begun to emerge in various parts of town as illustrated on the Existing Land
|
||
Use map. In particular, this development pattern has occurred along
|
||
Dogwood Road and Marion Avenue in the southeastern portion of the town
|
||
and along Dial Rock Road in the northeastern section of the town.
|
||
|
||
The second feature of the residential land use pattern is that due to the lack
|
||
of available land suitable for development, single-family houses are being
|
||
built on land that has a higher percentage of slope (i.e.25% and above).
|
||
Because of this condition, it is more expensive to develop land for single-
|
||
family uses due to increased costs in site preparation, road construction and
|
||
provision of infrastructure.
|
||
|
||
In contrast to the town’s residential development, commercial and industrial
|
||
land uses comprise a small percentage of the total developed land within
|
||
Tazewell. As illustrated in Table 2.2, commercial and industrial uses
|
||
accounted for a combined total of approximately 160 acres, or 3.8% of the
|
||
town’s total land area. The previous comprehensive plan identified a total
|
||
of approximately 100 acres dedicated to commercial and industrial uses,
|
||
which represents an increase of 60% over the past 25 years. This increase,
|
||
however, can partly be attributed to the different methods employed by
|
||
the two plans in classifying land uses along with an increase due to an
|
||
adjustment of the town’s boundary in 2000.
|
||
|
||
Commercial and industrial development is primarily located in the Four-
|
||
Way section of the town and along Riverside Drive in North Tazewell. There
|
||
are also scattered commercial and industrial sites throughout the town along
|
||
Fincastle Turnpike and Ben Bolt Avenue, Walnut Avenue, Main Street west
|
||
of the downtown, and near the Route 19/460 interchange with Tazewell
|
||
Avenue. In the downtown area there are also several mixed retail/office/
|
||
professional services uses present within the same building or land parcel.
|
||
|
||
Public and semi-public uses constitute 300 acres of developed land, or
|
||
7.3% of the town’s total land area. Although this amount of land dedicated
|
||
to these uses is more than commercial and industrial uses combined, it is
|
||
not surprising given the fact that the town is the seat of county government,
|
||
|
||
This suggests that the amount of land used for residential purposes in
|
||
Tazewell has increased by approximately one-third over the past two decades.
|
||
|
||
‘Two features characterize Tazewell’s residential land use pattern. The first
|
||
is that residential development now extends along the frontage of nearly
|
||
the town’s entire historical road network. This is typical of growth within a
|
||
‘community since development along existing roadways can generally be
|
||
accomplished quicker an less expensively compared with the need for
|
||
constructing new subdivision roadways and providing public utilities to access
|
||
back land parcels. As the amount of existing road frontage available for
|
||
residential development has decreased, however, new subdivisions have
|
||
begun to emerge in various parts of town as illustrated on the Existing Land
|
||
Use map. In particular, this development pattern has occurred along
|
||
Dogwood Road and Marion Avenue in the southeastern portion of the town
|
||
‘and along Dial Rock Road in the northeastern section of the town.
|
||
|
||
The second feature of the residential land use pattern is that due to the lack
|
||
of available land suitable for development, single-family houses are being
|
||
built on land that has a higher percentage of slope (i.e.25% and above)
|
||
Because of this condition, it is more expensive to develop land for single-
|
||
family uses due to increased costs in site preparation, road construction and
|
||
provision of infrastructure.
|
||
|
||
In contrast to the town's residential development, commercial and industrial
|
||
land uses comprise a small percentage of the total developed land within
|
||
Tazewell. Asillustrated in Table 2.2, commercial and industrial uses
|
||
accounted for a combined total of approximately 160 acres, or 3.8% of the
|
||
town's total land area. The previous comprehensive plan identified a total
|
||
of approximately 100 acres dedicated to commercial and industrial uses,
|
||
which represents an increase of 60% over the past 25 years. This increase,
|
||
however, can partly be attributed to the different methods employed by
|
||
the two plans in classifying land uses along with an increase due to an
|
||
adjustment of the town’s boundary in 2000.
|
||
|
||
Commercial and industrial development is primarily located in the Four-
|
||
Way section of the town and along Riverside Drive in North Tazewell. There
|
||
are also scattered commercial and industrial sites throughout the town along
|
||
Fincastle Turnpike and Ben Bolt Avenue, Walnut Avenue, Main Street west
|
||
of the downtown, and near the Route 19/460 interchange with Tazewell
|
||
‘Avenue. In the downtown area there are also several mixed retailloffice/
|
||
professional services uses present within the same building or land parcel.
|
||
|
||
Public and semi-public uses constitute 300 acres of developed land, or
|
||
7.3% of the town's total land area. Although this amount of land dedicated
|
||
to these uses is more than commercial and industrial uses combined, it is
|
||
not surprising given the fact that the town is the seat of county government,
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE Page 16
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Table 2.2 TOWN OF TAZEWELL EXISTING LAND USES-2015
|
||
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION ACERAGE % DEVELOPED LAND % TOTAL TOWN AREA
|
||
|
||
RESIDENTIAL
|
||
Single-Family 834 39.3% 15.5%
|
||
Multi-Family 50 3.6% 1.0%
|
||
|
||
Manufactured Homes 29 3.1% 0.4%
|
||
Subtotal 913 46.0% 16.9%
|
||
|
||
COMMERCIAL
|
||
General 52 2.4% 0.5%
|
||
|
||
Retail/Services 90 6.6% 2.1%
|
||
Office/Business/Prof. 21 0.7% 0.2%
|
||
|
||
Subtotal 143 9.7% 2.8%
|
||
Public/Semi-Public
|
||
Comm. Facilities 141 8.3% 2.7%
|
||
|
||
Places of Worship 62 2.4% 3.3%
|
||
Parks & Recreation 145 6.8% 1.3%
|
||
|
||
Subtotal 348 17.5% 7.3%
|
||
Industrial
|
||
Industrial 42 2.8% 2.8%
|
||
Subtotal 42 2.8% 2.8%
|
||
|
||
Roads/Rights-of-Way
|
||
Roads/Right-of-Ways 492 24.0% 9.4%
|
||
|
||
Subtotal 492 24.0% 9.4%
|
||
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA 1,938 100.0 37.4%
|
||
Vacant/Agricultural 2,595 ▬ 62.6%
|
||
|
||
TOTAL AREA 4,533 ▬ 100.0%
|
||
|
||
Table 2.2 TOWN OF TAZEWELL EXISTING LAND USES-2015
|
||
|
||
amy | near | FUROR | RTE TH
|
||
RESIDENTIAL
|
||
Single-Family 834 39.3% 15.5%
|
||
Multi-Family 50 3.6% 1.0%
|
||
Manufactured Homes 29 3.1% 0.4%
|
||
Subtotal 913 46.0% 16.9%
|
||
COMMERCIAL
|
||
General 52 2.4% 0.5%
|
||
Retail/Services 90 6.6% 2.1%
|
||
Office/Business/Prof. 2a 0.7% 0.2%
|
||
Subtotal 143 9.7% 2.8%
|
||
Public/Semi-Public
|
||
Comm. Facilities 141 8.3% 2.7%
|
||
Places of Worship 62 2.4% 3.3%
|
||
Parks & Recreation 145 6.8% 1.3%
|
||
Subtotal 348 17.5% 7.3%
|
||
Industrial
|
||
Industrial 42 2.8% 2.8%
|
||
Subtotal a2 2.8% 2.8%
|
||
Roads/Rights-of- Way
|
||
Roads/Right-of- Ways 492 24.0% 9.4%
|
||
‘Subtotal 492 24.0% 9.4%
|
||
alaarereaian 1,938 100.0 37.4%
|
||
Vacant/Agricultural 2,595 - 62.6%
|
||
TOTAL AREA 4,533 - 100.0%
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE Page 17
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
have a number of churches and includes a large park/recreational facility
|
||
(Lincolnshire Park). In 1975, there were only 76 acres dedicated for public/
|
||
semi-public uses, or 3.1% of the town’s total land area.
|
||
|
||
Although roads and rights-of-way are often overlooked when thinking of
|
||
developed land within a community, this use may account for up to 25-30%
|
||
of the developed land. In Tazewell this is the case, with 25% of the
|
||
developed land and 9.2% of the total land area dedicated to roads/rights-of-
|
||
way. This compares with 1975 when 29% of the developed land and 11.6%
|
||
of the town’s total land area was dedicated for this use.
|
||
|
||
The land use category that contains the largest amount of the town’s land
|
||
area is the undeveloped category, which includes vacant and agricultural
|
||
land. As shown in Table 2.2, the total amount of land that still remains
|
||
undeveloped in Tazewell is approximately 2,556 acres or 62.6% of the total
|
||
land area. In comparison, the 1975 plan identified 60% of the total land
|
||
area in the town as being undeveloped.
|
||
|
||
Although the town still has a considerable amount of undeveloped land
|
||
remaining , only a small amount can be considered as suitable for
|
||
development due to environmental constraints such as steep slopes,
|
||
unsuitable soils for building site development and land within the 100-year
|
||
floodplain.
|
||
|
||
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE
|
||
Tazewell’s land use development patterns are the result of many factors
|
||
that have had an impact on the town’s growth throughout its existence.
|
||
The characteristics of these development patterns have implications for all
|
||
other aspects considered in the comprehensive plan including future housing
|
||
construction, commercial and industrial development, open space and natural
|
||
resource conservation and the provision of community facilities.
|
||
|
||
There are a number of implications resulting from the trends identified in
|
||
the existing land use analysis. From a residential perspective, there is an
|
||
ample supply of undeveloped land to support the projected minimal or
|
||
even decreased population change in the town for the foreseeable future.
|
||
Most of the growth will likely occur at low densities in the R-1 Single-Family
|
||
Residential and A-1 Agricultural zoning districts.
|
||
|
||
As noted previously, residential development fronting the town’s historic
|
||
roadway corridors has created the beginnings of a rural sprawl land use
|
||
pattern. If continued, this pattern may foster a marginal increase in the
|
||
cost of local services such as police and fire protection, road maintenance
|
||
and utility upgrades and expansion.
|
||
|
||
have a number of churches and includesa large park/recreational facility
|
||
(Lincolnshire Park). In 1975, there were only 76 acres dedicated for public!
|
||
semi-public uses, or 3.1% of the town’s total land area
|
||
|
||
Although roads and rights-of-way are often overlooked when thinking of
|
||
developed land within a community, this use may account for up to 25-30%
|
||
of the developed land. In Tazewellthis is the case, with 25% of the
|
||
developed land and 9.2% of the total land area dedicated to roads/tights-of-
|
||
way. This compares with 1975 when 29% of the developed land and 11.6%
|
||
of the town's total land area was dedicated for this use.
|
||
|
||
The land use category that contains the largest amount of the town's land
|
||
area is the undeveloped category, which includes vacant and agricultural
|
||
land, As shown in Table 2.2, the total amount of land that still remains
|
||
undeveloped in Tazewell is approximately 2,556 acres or 62.6% of the total
|
||
land area. In comparison, the 1975 plan identified 60% of the total land
|
||
area in the town as being undeveloped.
|
||
|
||
Although the town still has a considerable amount of undeveloped land
|
||
remaining, only a small amount can be considered as suitable for
|
||
development due to environmental constraints such as steep slopes,
|
||
Unsuitable soils for building site development and land within the 100-year
|
||
floodplain
|
||
|
||
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s land use development patterns are the result of many factors
|
||
that have had an impact on the town's growth throughout its existence.
|
||
The characteristics of these development patterns have implications for all
|
||
other aspects considered in the comprehensive plan including future housing
|
||
construction, commercial and industrial development, open space and natural
|
||
resource conservation and the provision of community facilities
|
||
|
||
There area number of implications resulting from the trends identified in
|
||
the existing land use analysis. From a residential perspective, there is an
|
||
ample supply of undeveloped land to support the projected minimal or
|
||
even decreased population change in the town for the foreseeable future.
|
||
Most of the growth will likely occur at low densities in the R-1 Single-Family
|
||
Residential and A-1 Agricultural zoning districts,
|
||
|
||
As noted previously, residential development fronting the town’s historic
|
||
roadway corridors has created the beginnings of a rural sprawl land use
|
||
pattern. If continued, this pattern may foster a marginal increase in the
|
||
cost of local services such as police and fire protection, road maintenance
|
||
and utility upgrades and expansion.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE Page 18
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
As the amount of developable road frontage decreases, the demand for
|
||
constructing new subdivision roads into back lands on steep slopes increases.
|
||
New road construction will require additional road maintenance, increase
|
||
the need for storm water management, and increase the cost for providing
|
||
public utilities. In addition, the extension of subdivision roads has implications
|
||
for open space, ridgeline protection and land conservation issues. If not
|
||
properly monitored, new single-family large lot development can fragment
|
||
large tracts of land thus reducing the value of these tracts from a natural
|
||
resource standpoint. It will be many decades before the town ever
|
||
approaches its residential build out capacity, but changes in the rural
|
||
landscape have already begun to occur in a fashion that is becoming apparent
|
||
to long-time residents of the town.
|
||
|
||
Within the last decade, housing construction such as Forest Glen off Dogwood
|
||
Road has added the availability of more affordably priced housing units,
|
||
mainly duplex and triplex townhouse type units. The town should consider
|
||
encouraging the use of this type of alternative development in the future to
|
||
accommodate its aging population while at the same time achieving land
|
||
conservation goals. In addition, the town should encourage housing
|
||
rehabilitation and infill housing within existing neighborhoods in order to
|
||
preserve the existing housing stock and to limit the need to build on
|
||
undeveloped land.
|
||
|
||
In comparison to residential growth, commercial and industrial development
|
||
in Tazewell has been much more limited. One of the implications of this
|
||
condition is that the town has a smaller tax base to help offset the costs
|
||
associated with increases in residential development. Although there are a
|
||
number of factors that influence commercial and industrial development,
|
||
the limited amount of land available for these uses due to environmental
|
||
constraints, limited access to major transportation routes and closely held
|
||
family ownership of large developable tracts has played a role in limiting
|
||
their expansion.
|
||
|
||
Currently, only four percent of the town’s total land is dedicated to
|
||
commercial and industrial uses. One of the factors contributing to limited
|
||
commercial development is that the town’s zoning ordinance allows
|
||
residential uses as a permitted use within the B-2 General Business district.
|
||
As a consequence, a portion of the land that could be used for commercial
|
||
purposes is dedicated to housing .
|
||
|
||
The town may want to encourage additional commercial development at
|
||
strategic locations within the B-1 Neighborhood Business district that would
|
||
make available to area residents services that would reduce their need to
|
||
drive through the more congested areas of town.
|
||
|
||
As the amount of developable road frontage decreases, the demand for
|
||
constructing new subdivision roads into back lands on steep slopes increases.
|
||
New road construction will require additional road maintenance, increase
|
||
the need for storm water management, and increase the cost for provi
|
||
public utilities. In addition, the extension of subdivision roads has implications
|
||
for open space, ridgeline protection and land conservation issues. If not
|
||
properly monitored, new single-family large lot development can fragment
|
||
large tracts of land thus reducing the value of these tracts from a natural
|
||
resource standpoint. It will be many decades before the town ever
|
||
approaches its residential build out capacity, but changes in the rural
|
||
landscape have already begun to occur in a fashion that is becoming apparent
|
||
to long-time residents of the town.
|
||
|
||
Within the last decade, housing construction. such as Forest Glen off Dogwood
|
||
Road has added the availability of more affordably priced housing units,
|
||
mainly duplex and triplex townhouse type units. The town should consider
|
||
‘encouraging the use of this type of alternative development in the future to
|
||
accommodate its aging population while at the same time achieving land
|
||
conservation goals. In addition, the town should encourage housing
|
||
rehabilitation and infill housing within existing neighborhoods in order to
|
||
preserve the existing housing stock and to limit the need to build on
|
||
undeveloped land.
|
||
|
||
In comparison to residential growth, commercial and industrial development
|
||
in Tazewell has been much more limited. One of the implications of this
|
||
condition is that the town has a smaller tax base to help offset the costs
|
||
associated with increases in residential development. Although there area
|
||
number of factors that influence commercial and industrial development,
|
||
the limited amount of land available for these uses due to environmental
|
||
constraints, limited access to major transportation routes and closely held
|
||
family ownership of large developable tracts has played role in limiting
|
||
their expansion.
|
||
|
||
Currently, only four percent of the town’s total land is dedicated to
|
||
‘commercial and industrial uses. One of the factors contributing to limited
|
||
commercial development is that the town’s zoning ordinance allows
|
||
residential uses as a permitted use within the B-2 General Business district.
|
||
‘As aconsequence, a portion of the land that could be used for commercial
|
||
purposes is dedicated to housing
|
||
|
||
The town may want to encourage additional commercial development at
|
||
strategic locations within the B-1 Neighborhood Business district that would
|
||
make available to area residents services that would reduce their need to
|
||
drive through the more congested areas of town
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND USE Page 19
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
INTRODUCTION Population and housing are interrelated factors that should be considered in
|
||
a community’s decision-making process regarding its future land use,
|
||
economic, and community facility’s needs. Whether or not a community’s
|
||
population is increasing , decreasing , remaining stable, aging or becoming
|
||
younger influences the type and number of housing units as well as the
|
||
type and extent of community facilities and services required in the future.
|
||
It is necessary, therefore, to present a historical perspective of what has
|
||
occurred with the Town of Tazewell and the region as it relates to population
|
||
and housing and to make assumptions about what will be the trends for the
|
||
town in the future.
|
||
|
||
This chapter examines the changes that have occurred in the Town of
|
||
Tazewell’s population and housing within the past several decades. The
|
||
first half of the chapter presents an overview of historic population trends
|
||
and presents two alternative growth projections for the town over the next
|
||
20 years. The historical population analysis includes a comparison of the
|
||
Town of Tazewell with other towns in Tazewell County, and with counties
|
||
in the Cumberland Plateau Planning District (Buchanan, Dickenson, Russell,
|
||
and Tazewell) in order to provide a regional perspective for growth within
|
||
the town. The population analysis also presents changes in the overall age
|
||
composition of the town over the past decade.
|
||
|
||
The second half of the chapter focuses on the changing make-up of the
|
||
town’s housing stock. This includes an analysis that examines total housing
|
||
growth, the composition of the housing supply and housing affordability.
|
||
|
||
WHO WE ARE AND WHERE WE LIVE
|
||
• From 1970 to 2000 the Town of Tazewell’s population remained virtually
|
||
unchanged. In 1970 the town’s population was 4,168 and in 2000 it was
|
||
4,206 for a net increase of only 38 people over this time period. A 2002
|
||
Boundary Adjustment brought the population count to its current 4,627
|
||
people.
|
||
Although the town’s population increased by only 30 persons from 1990 to
|
||
2000, in contrast, Buchanan, Dickerson, and Tazewell Counties lost
|
||
population during this decade.
|
||
The town’s population is aging. The median age for the town in 2014 is 44.1
|
||
years versus approximately 25 years of age in 1960. The median age for
|
||
the town is higher than it is for Tazewell County and for all of the other
|
||
counties within the Cumberland Plateau Planning District.
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
Population and housing are interrelated factors that should be considered in
|
||
a community's decision-making process regarding its future land use,
|
||
economic, and community facility's needs. Whether or not a community's
|
||
population is increasing, decreasing, remaining stable, aging or becoming
|
||
younger influences the type and number of housing units as well as the
|
||
type and extent of community facilities and services required in the future.
|
||
It is necessary, therefore, to present a historical perspective of what has
|
||
occurred with the Town of Tazewell and the region as it relates to population
|
||
and housing and to make assumptions about what will be the trends for the
|
||
town in the future.
|
||
|
||
This chapter examines the changes that have occurred in the Town of
|
||
Tazewell’s population and housing within the past several decades. The
|
||
firsthalf of the chapter presents an overview of historic population trends
|
||
and presents two alternative growth projections for the town over the next
|
||
20 years. The historical population analysis includes a comparison of the
|
||
‘Town of Tazewell with other towns in Tazewell County, and with counties
|
||
in the Cumberland Plateau Planning District (Buchanan, Dickenson, Russell,
|
||
and Tazewell) in order to provide a regional perspective for growth within
|
||
the town. The population analysis also presents changes in the overall age
|
||
‘composition of the town overthe past decade.
|
||
|
||
The second half of the chapter focuses on the changing make-up of the
|
||
town's housing stock. This includes an analysis that examines total housing
|
||
growth, the composition of the housing supply and housing affordability.
|
||
|
||
WHO WE ARE AND WHERE WE LIVE
|
||
|
||
From 1970 to 2000 the Town of Tazewell’s population remained virtually
|
||
unchanged. In 1970 the town's population was 4,168 and in 2000 it was
|
||
4,206 for a net increase of only 38 people over this time period. A 2002
|
||
Boundary Adjustment brought the population count to its current 4,627
|
||
people.
|
||
|
||
Although the town's population increased by only 30 persons from 1990 to
|
||
2000, in contrast, Buchanan, Dickerson, and Tazewell Counties lost
|
||
population during this decade.
|
||
|
||
The town's population is aging. The median age for the town in 2014 is 44.1
|
||
years versus approximately 25 years of age in 1960. The median age for
|
||
the town is higher than it is for Tazewell County and for all of the other
|
||
counties within the Cumberland Plateau Planning District
|
||
|
||
EXISTING LAND
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
Page 20
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
•
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION
|
||
|
||
LOCAL POPULATION TRENDS An analysis of population growth in the Town of Tazewell over the last several
|
||
decades reveals a predictable trend. Like many towns and counties in the
|
||
southwestern portion of the state, Tazewell has either lost population or
|
||
increased its population only slightly between 1970 and 2000. The total
|
||
population of the town increased by only38 people over this period. Examining
|
||
the total change in population for each of the three decades reveals that
|
||
Tazewell experienced growth during the 1970’s, decline in the 80’s, and
|
||
little change in the 90’s. Table 2.3 presents the change in total population
|
||
for these four decades.
|
||
TABLE 2.3 TOTAL POPULATION 1970-2013 Town of Tazewell YEAR TOTAL YEARS CHANGE % CHANGE
|
||
1980 4,468 1970-80 300 7.2%
|
||
1990 4,176 1980-90 -292 6.5%
|
||
2000 4,206 1990-00 30 .07%
|
||
2013 4,627 2000-13 421 10.0 %
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
The largest increase in population from 1990 to 2000 in town was in the
|
||
50 to 59 age group (+180), or a 48.1% increase. The largest decline was
|
||
in the 30 to 39 age group (-124), or a 19.6% decrease. The group with the
|
||
second largest percentage increase in population was the 80 and over age
|
||
group with a 27.9% increase in population size.
|
||
Population forecasts for the town and the county indicate that the area’s
|
||
total population will decline over the next twenty years.
|
||
The number of single-family detached and multi-family housing units
|
||
increased slightly over the past decade, while the number of mobile homes
|
||
in the town decreased.
|
||
The housing stock in Tazewell is aging, with over 60% of the houses in the
|
||
town built prior to 1970.
|
||
A significant percentage of the households in the town are paying more for
|
||
housing than is considered “affordable”. Approximately 32% of renters are
|
||
paying 35% or more of their household incomes on rent, while
|
||
approximately 28% of owners are paying 30% or more of their household
|
||
incomes on mortgage payments.
|
||
Approximately 44% of the households in the town cannot afford the
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010
|
||
|
||
The largest increase in population from 1990 to 2000 in town was in the
|
||
50 to 59 age group (+180), or a 48.1% increase. The largest decline was
|
||
in the 30 to 39 age group (-124), or a 19.6% decrease. The group with the
|
||
second largest percentage increase in population was the 80 and over age
|
||
group with a 27.9% increase in population size.
|
||
|
||
Population forecasts for the town and the county indicate that the area's,
|
||
total population will decline over the next twenty years.
|
||
|
||
The number of single-family detached and multi-family housing units
|
||
increased slightly over the past decade, while the number of mobile homes
|
||
in the town decreased.
|
||
|
||
, with over 60% of the houses in the
|
||
|
||
The housing stock in Tazewell is agir
|
||
town built prior to 1970,
|
||
|
||
A significant percentage of the households in the town are paying more for
|
||
housing than is considered “affordable”. Approximately 32% of renters are
|
||
paying 35% or more of their household incomes on rent, while
|
||
approximately 28% of owners are paying 30% or more of their household
|
||
incomes on mortgage payments.
|
||
|
||
POPULATION
|
||
|
||
LOCAL POPULATION TRENDS
|
||
|
||
‘An analysis of population growth in the Town of Tazewell over the last several
|
||
decades reveals a predictable trend. Like many towns and counties in the
|
||
southwestern portion of the state, Tazewell has either lost population or
|
||
increased its population only slightly between 1970 and 2000. The total
|
||
population of the town increased by only38 people over this period. Examining
|
||
the total change in population for each of the three decades reveals that
|
||
Tazewell experienced growth during the 1970's, decline in the 80's, and
|
||
little change in the 90's. Table 2.3 presents the change in total population
|
||
for these four decades.
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.3 TOTAL POPULATION 1970-2013 Town of Tazewell
|
||
|
||
YEAR TOTAL YEARS. «CHANGE = % CHANGE
|
||
1980 4,468 1970-80 300 7.2%
|
||
1990 4.176 1980-90 -292 6.5%
|
||
2000 4,206 1990-00 30 07%
|
||
2013 4,627 2000-13 421 10.0 %
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Page 21
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
For planning purposes, more significant than the minor change in the
|
||
size of Tazewell’s population within the past 30 years has been the
|
||
change in the age distribution of the population. This factor constitutes
|
||
an important consideration for future choices in housing and community
|
||
facility’s needs. The data i llustrates that the town’s population is
|
||
reflecting a national trend that involves an overall increase in the median
|
||
age of residents. Between 1960 and 2000, the median age of residents
|
||
in Tazewe l l inc reased f rom 25 to 43.3 years , an inc rease o f
|
||
approximately 18 years. Table 2.4 illustrates the increase in median
|
||
age for the town as well as for the region and the state over the past
|
||
forty years.
|
||
TABLE 2.4 MEDIAN AGE COMPARISONS 1960-2000 THE REGION + THE STATE
|
||
|
||
|
||
MEDIAN AGE
|
||
|
||
LOCALITY 1960 2000 2010 Town of Tazewell 25.0 43.3 44.7
|
||
Tazewell County 24.8 40.7 43.5 Buchanan County 18.7 38.8 44.8 Dickenson County 20.0 39.7 43.6
|
||
Russell County 24.0 38.7 43.3 Virginia 27.1 35.7 35.1
|
||
A closer examination of specific age cohorts within the population reveals
|
||
the underlying basis for this overall aging trend. As illustrated in Figure 1 on
|
||
the following page, the largest consistent gains in population between
|
||
1990 and 2000 occurred in the 40-49 and 50-59 age groups. During this
|
||
time period, these cohorts accounted for increases of approximately 17%
|
||
and 48%, respectively. A notable percentage increase also occurred in
|
||
the 80 and over age group, which had a total increase of almost 28% for
|
||
the decade. As seen the age has increased on average of 4 years as
|
||
of the 2010 census.
|
||
|
||
In contrast, there have been decreases in the younger age cohorts of the
|
||
population. For example, the 10-19 and the 30-39 age groups combined
|
||
declined from approximately 29% of the total population in 1990 to
|
||
approximately 23% of the population in 2000. In addition, the Under 10
|
||
age group declined from 12.1% to 10.3% during the same time period.
|
||
All three of these age cohorts experienced a decline not only as a
|
||
percentage of total population but in actual numbers as well over the last
|
||
ten years.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010
|
||
|
||
For planning purposes, more significant than the minor change in the
|
||
size of Tazewell’s population within the past 30 years has been the
|
||
change in the age distribution of the population. This factor constitutes
|
||
an important consideration for future choices in housing and community
|
||
facility's needs. The data illustrates that the town's population is
|
||
reflecting a national trend that involves an overall increase in the median
|
||
age of residents. Between 1960 and 2000, the median age of residents
|
||
in Tazewell increased from 25 to 43.3 years, an increase of
|
||
approximately 18 years. Table 2.4 illustrates the increase in median
|
||
age for the town as well as for the region and the state over the past
|
||
forty years,
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.4 MEDIAN AGE COMPARISONS 1960-2000
|
||
THE REGION + THE STATE
|
||
|
||
MEDIAN AGE
|
||
LOCALITY 1960 2000 2010
|
||
Town of Tazewell 25.0 43.3 44.7
|
||
Tazewell County 24.8 40.7 43.5
|
||
Buchanan County 18.7 38.8 44.8
|
||
Dickenson County 20.0 397 43.6
|
||
Russell County 24.0 38.7 43.3
|
||
Virginia 274 35.7 35.4
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010
|
||
|
||
closer examination of specific age cohorts within the population reveals
|
||
the underlying basis for this overall aging trend. As illustrated in Figure 1 on
|
||
the following page, the largest consistent gains in population between
|
||
1990 and 2000 occurred in the 40-49 and 50-59 age groups. During this
|
||
time period, these cohorts accounted for increases of approximately 17%
|
||
and 48%, respectively. A notable percentage increase also occurred in
|
||
the 80 and over age group, which had a total increase of almost 28% for
|
||
the decade. As seen the age has increased on average of 4 years as
|
||
of the 2010 census.
|
||
|
||
In contrast, there have been decreases in the younger age cohorts of the
|
||
population. For example, the 10-19 and the 30-39 age groups combined
|
||
declined from approximately 29% of the total population in 1990 to
|
||
approximately 23% of the population in 2000. In addition, the Under 10
|
||
age group declined from 12.1% to 10.3% during the same time period.
|
||
All three of these age cohorts experienced a decline not only asa
|
||
percentage of total population but in actual numbers as well over the last
|
||
ten years.
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
Page 21
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Page 22
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 1
|
||
The only younger age cohort that did not decline over the past decade is the 20-29 age group. During the
|
||
previous decade, this group experienced an increase in actual numbers and percentage of population,
|
||
adding 46 people and increasing by 9.3% between 1990 and 2000.
|
||
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.5 POPULATION AGE DISTRIBUTION 1990-2000-2010
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
|
||
TOTAL PERSONS % OF TOTAL CHANGE % CHANGE
|
||
|
||
AGE 1990 2000 2010 1990 2000 2010 1990-
|
||
2000
|
||
|
||
2000-
|
||
2010 1990-2010
|
||
|
||
Under 10 507 433 488 12.1% 10.3% 10.5% -74 -19 -4%
|
||
10 TO 19 561 441 522 13.4% 10.5% 11% -120 -81 -6.50%
|
||
20 TO 29 494 540 380 11.8% 12.8% 9% 46 -114 -23%
|
||
30 TO 39 634 510 528 15.2% 12.1% 11.5% -124 +18 3%
|
||
40 TO 49 529 620 574 12.7% 14.7% 12% 91 -46 -8%
|
||
50 TO 59 374 554 703 9.0% 13.2% 15.5% 180 149 27%
|
||
60 TO 69 480 410 600 11.5% 9.8% 13.5% -70 190 25%
|
||
70 TO 79 353 386 432 8.5% 9.2% 10% 33 79 23%
|
||
|
||
80 + 244 312 312 5.8% 7.4% 7% 68 0 0%
|
||
TOTAL 4176 4206 4627 100% 100% 100% 30 421 10.7%
|
||
|
||
-200
|
||
-100
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
100
|
||
200
|
||
300
|
||
400
|
||
500
|
||
600
|
||
700
|
||
|
||
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
|
||
|
||
1990
|
||
2000
|
||
2010
|
||
ChangePop
|
||
|
||
ula
|
||
tion
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Town of Tazewell Population Change 1990-2010
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990, 2000, & 2010
|
||
|
||
Under 10 10 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 59 60 to 69 70 to 79 80 & Over
|
||
Age Group
|
||
|
||
‘Town of Tazewell Population Change 1990-2010
|
||
|
||
Population
|
||
|
||
Under10 10019 201029 30039 40t049 —S0t059 GOLGI 701079 80k Over
|
||
|
||
‘Age Group
|
||
|
||
Figure 1
|
||
|
||
The only younger age cohort that did not decline over the past decade is the 20-29 age group. During the
|
||
previous decade, this group experienced an increase in actual numbers and percentage of population,
|
||
adding 46 people and increasing by 9.3% between 1990 and 2000.
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.5 POPULATION AGE DISTRIBUTION 1990-2000-2010
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
TOTAL PERSONS % OF TOTAL CHANGE | % CHANGE
|
||
1990- | 2000-
|
||
AGE 1990 | 2000 | 2010 | 1990 2000 | 2010 | oo) | Soro | 1990-2000
|
||
Under 10 sor | 433 [ass [i2a% | toa | 103% [74 “19 4%
|
||
10 TO 19 sor | 441 [522 [13.4% | 1os% | 1i% | -1200 | 1 6.50%
|
||
2070 29 494 | s4o_[ 380 [118% | 128% | 9% 46 | -1i4 “23%
|
||
307039 oa [sto [sos [15.2% [2% [ins [ia [vis 3%
|
||
407049 29 [oo [sma [iam [14% [2% [on 46 8%
|
||
507059 soa | ssa_[ 703 [9.0% [13.2% | 1s.s% | 180 | 149 27%
|
||
60 TO 69 4s0_| aio | 600_[iis% | 98% | i3.s% [70 190 25%
|
||
707079 353 | 380 [432 [asm [92% [10% 33 7 23%
|
||
80+ ag [312312 [| s.sm%e [7.4% ™% 68 0 0%
|
||
TOTAL 4176 [4206 [4627 [100% [100% [100% [30 21 10.7%
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990, 2000, & 2010
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
|
||
Page 22 —_
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
Page 23
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL POPULATION TRENDS The preceding section presented changes in Tazewell’s population base over
|
||
the last several decades. The town’s growth, however, is not just a local
|
||
phenomenon but is influenced by factors occurring at broader geographic levels
|
||
within the county, the region, the state and the Mid-Atlant ic States. Over the
|
||
last decade, Virg inia’s total population has experienced a net gain of 1,813,666
|
||
people, an increase of 29%. Counties and towns within the Cumberland Plateau
|
||
Planning District, however, have either lost population or increased only slightly
|
||
during this time period. Tazewell County lost 882 people, Buchanan declined by
|
||
7,235 and Dickenson County decreased its population by1,357 from 1990 to 2010.
|
||
Only Russell County increased its population by 230 during the decade. This data
|
||
is i llustrated in Table 2.6.
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.6 POPULATION CHANGE 1990-2010 CUMBERLAND PLATEAU PLANNING DISTRICT AND VIRGINIA
|
||
LOCALITY
|
||
|
||
Town of Tazewell 4,176 4,206 4,627 451 11%
|
||
Richlands 4,456 4,144 5,823 1367 31%
|
||
Bluefield 5,363 5,078 5,444 81 2%
|
||
Lebanon 3,386 3,273 3,424 64 2%
|
||
Grundy 1,305 1,105 1,021 -284 -22%
|
||
|
||
Tazewell County 45,960 44,598 45,078 -882 2%
|
||
Buchanan County 31,333 26,978 24,098 -7235 -23%
|
||
Dickenson County 17,620 16,395 15,903 -1357 -8%
|
||
|
||
Russell County 28,667 30,308 28,897 230 1%
|
||
Virginia 6,187,358 7,078,516 8,001,024 1,813,666 29%
|
||
|
||
|
||
All four of the counties in the Cumberland Plateau Planning District combined
|
||
only account for 1.9% of the state’s total population for the 2010 Census.
|
||
This downward trend in population for the four counties has not always been
|
||
the case, however. From 1970 to 1980, all of the counties increased their
|
||
population. Tazewell County, for example, experienced almost a 27% increase
|
||
in its population for this time period. The trend reversed itself in the 1980’s,
|
||
however, when all of the counties in the Planning District declined in
|
||
population. Figure 2 i llustrates the up and down trend in population rise
|
||
and decline that has occurred in the region for the past four decades.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
1990 2000
|
||
TOTAL PERSONS CHANGE % CHANGE
|
||
|
||
2010 1990-2010 1990-2010
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL POPULATION TRENDS
|
||
|
||
The preceding section presented changes in Tazewell’s population base over
|
||
the last several decades. The town's growth, however, is not just a local
|
||
phenomenon but is influenced by factors occurring at broader geographic levels,
|
||
within the county, the region, the state and the Mid-Atlantic States. Over the
|
||
last decade, Virginia's totalpopulation has experienced a net gain of 1,813,666
|
||
people, an increase of 29%. Counties and towns within the Cumberland Plateau
|
||
Planning District, however, have either lost population or increased only slightly
|
||
during this time period. Tazewell Countylost 882 people, Buchanan declined by
|
||
7,235 and Dickenson County decreased its population by 1,357 from 1990 to 2010.
|
||
‘Only Russell County increased its population by 230 during the decade. This data
|
||
is illustrated in Table 2.6.
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.6 POPULATION CHANGE 1990-2010
|
||
CUMBERLAND PLATEAU PLANNING DISTRICT AND VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
TOTAL PERSONS CHANGE % CHANGE
|
||
|
||
LOCALITY 1990 2000 2010 1990-2010 1990-2010
|
||
Town of Tazewell 4,176 4,206 4,627 451 11%
|
||
Richlands 4,456 4144 5,823 1367 31%
|
||
Bluefield 5,363 5,078 5,444 81 2%
|
||
Lebanon 3,386 3,273 3,424 64 2%
|
||
Grundy 1,305 1,105 1,021 -284 -22%
|
||
Tazewell County 45,960 44,598 45,078 -882 2%
|
||
Buchanan County | 31,333 26,978 24,098 -7235 -23%
|
||
Dickenson County | 17,620 16,395 15,903 -1357 8%
|
||
Russell County 28,667 30,308 28,897 230 1%
|
||
Virginia 6,187,358 7,078,516 8,001,024 1,813,666 29%
|
||
|
||
All four of the counties in the Cumberland Plateau Planning District combined
|
||
only account for 1.9% of the state's total population for the 2010 Census
|
||
This downward trend in population for the four counties has not always been
|
||
the case, however. From 1970 to 1980, all of the counties increased their
|
||
population. Tazewell County, for example, experienced almost a 27% increase
|
||
in its population for this time period. The trend reversed itselfin the 1980's,
|
||
however, when all of the counties in the Planning District declined in
|
||
population. Figure 2 illustrates the up and down trend in population rise
|
||
and decline that has occurred in the region for the past four decades
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
Page 23
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
Page 24
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 2
|
||
POPULATION FORECASTS The potential long-term population growth of the Town of Tazewell cannot
|
||
be predicted with certainty. Population changes are subject to many local,
|
||
regional and national influences such as economic and income growth, real
|
||
estate cycles, changes in interest rates, fluctuations in the stock market, net
|
||
migration, natural increase, infrastructure improvements, etc. Projections
|
||
that rely upon historical population trends, therefore, should be considered
|
||
with a degree of skepticism. A prime example of this uncertainty in population
|
||
trends would be what occurred in the town within the last several decades.
|
||
From 1970 to 1980 the town increased its population by 300, but by the
|
||
end of the 1980’s, the town experienced a decline in population of 292
|
||
persons. From 1990 to 2010 town has had an increase of 451 people.
|
||
|
||
Having made this disclaimer, however, population forecasts that rely upon
|
||
some form of historical trends are generally accepted as being reflections of
|
||
long-term population changes. Based upon historical conditions, two
|
||
alternative methods have been developed for projected growth in Tazewell
|
||
over the next twenty years. These are presented in the following narrative
|
||
and tables.
|
||
|
||
Method One uses a linear arithmetic model, or straight-line projection. It
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
10000
|
||
20000
|
||
30000
|
||
40000
|
||
50000
|
||
60000
|
||
|
||
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
|
||
|
||
Tazewell County
|
||
Buchanan County
|
||
Dickeson County
|
||
Russell County
|
||
|
||
Population Change in the PDC 1960-2010
|
||
|
||
Pop
|
||
ula
|
||
|
||
tion
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
|
||
Population Change in the PDC 1960-2010
|
||
|
||
60000
|
||
50000
|
||
40000 —eTazewell County
|
||
30000 Buchanan County
|
||
20000 —t—Dickeson County
|
||
Russell County
|
||
10000
|
||
0 — —
|
||
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
|
||
5
|
||
5
|
||
Figure 2
|
||
POPULATION FORECASTS
|
||
|
||
The potential long-term population growth of the Town of Tazewell cannot
|
||
be predicted with certainty. Population changes are subject to many local,
|
||
regional and national influences such as economic and income growth, real
|
||
estate cycles, changes in interest rates, fluctuations in the stock market, net
|
||
migration, natural increase, infrastructure improvements, etc. Projections
|
||
that rely upon historical population trends, therefore, should be considered
|
||
with a degree of skepticism. A prime example of this uncertainty in population
|
||
trends would be what occurred in the town within the last several decades.
|
||
From 1970 to 1980 the town increased its population by 300, but by the
|
||
end of the 1980's, the town experienced a decline in population of 292
|
||
persons. From 1990 to 2010 town has had an increase of 451 people.
|
||
|
||
Having made this disclaimer, however, population forecasts that rely upon
|
||
some form of historical trends are generally accepted as being reflections of
|
||
long-term population changes. Based upon historical conditions, two
|
||
alternative methods have been developed for projected growth in Tazewell
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
Page 24
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
assumes that the population will increase by equal increments based upon
|
||
an average of the growth over the past three decades and that this pattern
|
||
will continue into the future. Table 2.7 reveals that the average increment
|
||
of population change between 1970 and 2020 for the town is 13. The
|
||
limitation of this model is that it does not account for changes in net
|
||
migration.
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
|
||
Page 24
|
||
|
||
assumes that the population will increase by equal increments based upon
|
||
an average of the growth over the past three decades and that this pattern
|
||
will continue into the future. Table 2.7 reveals that the average increment
|
||
of population change between 1970 and 2020 for the town is 13. The
|
||
limitation of this model is that it does not account for changes in net
|
||
migration.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
Page 25
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.7 LINEAR POPULATION FORECAST 1970-2020
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
TOTAL
|
||
YEAR POP. YEARS CHANGE % CHANGE
|
||
|
||
|
||
1970 1980
|
||
|
||
1990 2000 2010
|
||
2020
|
||
|
||
4,168 4,468 4,176
|
||
4,206 4,219 4,232
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
1970-80 1980-90 1990-00
|
||
2000-10 2010-20
|
||
|
||
--- 300
|
||
-292 30 13
|
||
13
|
||
|
||
--- 7.2% -6.5%
|
||
0.7% 0.3% 0.3%
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Method Two employs a modified ratio-share model. In this approach, the
|
||
Town population is assumed to bear a certain relationship to the County
|
||
population. The historical ratios are expressed as percentages in Table 2.8.
|
||
As the table indicates, the town’s population has averaged approximately
|
||
9.5% of the county’s population from 1970 to 2000. Based upon the Virginia
|
||
Employment Commission’s 2010 and 2020 population projections for
|
||
Tazewell County, the town’s 9.46% share of the county ’s total results in
|
||
projected decreases in the town’s population to 4,030 by 2010 and to 3,935
|
||
by 2020.
|
||
TABLE 2.8 HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH AND FORECASTS 1970-2020 TOWN OF TAZEWELL AND TAZEWELL COUNTY YEAR AND TOTAL POPULATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
LOCALITY 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
|
||
Town of Tazewell 4,168 4,468 4,176 4,206 4,030 3,935
|
||
Tazewell County Town as % of
|
||
|
||
39,816 50,511 45,960 44,598 42,600 41,600
|
||
|
||
County Pop. 10.47% 8.85% 9.09% 9.43% 9.46% 9.46%
|
||
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census data and Virginia Employment Commission
|
||
|
||
‘TABLE 2.7 LINEAR POPULATION FORECAST 1970-2020
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
TOTAL
|
||
YEAR Pop. YEARS CHANGE % CHANGE
|
||
1970 4,168 - _ _
|
||
1980 4,468 1970-80 300 7.2%
|
||
1990 4,176 1980-90 -292 6.5%
|
||
2000 4,206 1990-00 30 0.7%
|
||
2010 4,219 2000-10 B 0.3%
|
||
2020 4,232 2010-20 8 0.3%
|
||
|
||
Method Two employs a modified ratio-share model. In this approach, the
|
||
‘Town population is assumed to beara certain relationship to the County
|
||
population. The historical ratios are expressed as percentages in Table 2.8.
|
||
As the table indicates, the town’s population has averaged approximately
|
||
9.5% of the county’s population from 1970 to 2000. Based upon the Virginia
|
||
Employment Commission's 2010 and 2020 population projections for
|
||
Tazewell County, the town’s 9.46% share of the county's total results in
|
||
projected decreases in the town’s population to 4,030 by 2010 and to 3,935
|
||
by2020.
|
||
|
||
‘TABLE 2.8 HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH AND FORECASTS 1970-2020
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL AND TAZEWELL COUNTY
|
||
YEAR AND TOTAL POPULATION.
|
||
|
||
LOCALITY 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
|
||
|
||
Town of Tazewell 4,168 4,468 4,176 4,206 4,030 3,935
|
||
Tazewell County 39,816 50,511 45,960 44,598 42,600 41,600
|
||
Town as % of
|
||
|
||
County Pop. 10.47% 8.85% 9.09% 9.43% 9.46% 9.46%
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census data and Virginia Employment Commission
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
|
||
Page 25
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING Page 26
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSING SUPPLY Tazewell’s housing supply has increased slightly over the last decade. Based
|
||
on Census data, the total number of housing units in the town has grown by
|
||
62 units, an increase of 3.5% between 1990 and 2000. As illustrated in
|
||
Table 2.9, single-family detached units experienced the largest increase
|
||
during the decade (82 units). Multi-family dwellings, which include structures
|
||
containing two or more units, also increased (23 units). Mobile homes,
|
||
however, decreased during the period (-50 units).
|
||
TABLE 2.9 TOTAL HOUSING BY TYPE 1990-2010
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
HOUSING TYPE
|
||
UNIT COUNTS CHANGE CHANGE % CHANGE
|
||
|
||
1990 2000 2010 1990-2000 2000-2010 1990-2010 Single- Family Detached Attached
|
||
1,372 1,454 1,462 82 90 7.0 %
|
||
|
||
18 25 35 7 17 95.0%
|
||
Multi-Family 210 233 345 23 135 65.0%
|
||
Mobile Home 173 123 205 -50 32 19.0%
|
||
TOTAL 1,773 1,835 2047 62 274 16.0%
|
||
|
||
|
||
The percentage of owner-occupied versus renter-occupied dwellings
|
||
decreased slightly between 1990 and 2000. In 1990, 25.3% (449 units) of
|
||
the town’s total housing units were rental units versus 65.1% (1,154 units)
|
||
which were owner-occupied. The remaining 9.6% (170 units) were vacant
|
||
units. As of 2000, 29.4% (539 units) were rental units, while 60.5% (1,111
|
||
units) were identified as owner-occupied, with the remaining units 10.1%
|
||
(185 units) identified as vacant, seasonal or recreational.
|
||
|
||
The age of Tazewell’s housing stock is illustrated in Figure 3 and Table 2.10.
|
||
This type of data provides an indication of potential deficiencies in the
|
||
quality and safety of dwelling units. Older houses, manufactured homes
|
||
and multi-family units may have been constructed to lesser standards from
|
||
the perspective of building codes and life safety requirements. This can be
|
||
of particular concern in terms of maintenance and upkeep of older units in
|
||
order to retain them as standard housing units in the town’s housing stock.
|
||
As the data in the table indicates, a significant portion of Tazewell’s housing
|
||
stock is aging . Approximately 60% of the town’s housing units (1,082 units)
|
||
were built prior to 1970.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1990, 2000 & 2010
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
|
||
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSING SUPPLY
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s housing supply has increased slightly over the last decade. Based
|
||
‘on Census data, the total number of housing units in the town has grown by
|
||
62 units, an increase of 3.5% between 1990 and 2000. As illustrated in
|
||
Table 2.9, single-family detached units experienced the largest increase
|
||
during the decade (82 units). Multi-family dwellings, which include structures
|
||
containing two or more units, also increased (23 units). Mobile homes,
|
||
however, decreased during the period (-50 units).
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.9 TOTAL HOUSING BY TYPE 1990-2010
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
%
|
||
wousne unt counts nance | cHance | cy.dce
|
||
vee "599. | —2o00- | “T380"
|
||
1990 2000 2010 2000. 2010, 2010
|
||
Sage
|
||
samy, Camas pa a9
|
||
wore
|
||
petacred | ap | 2s | as | 7 | a7 | 850%
|
||
te
|
||
Mut | ~oi0 | a8 | sus | x | nas | osx
|
||
Wobie | a7 | a2a_| 208 | 50 | 3 | 190%
|
||
Tora | ~a773 | 4938 | 2007 | 62 | 28 | t60%
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1990, 2000 & 2010
|
||
The percentage of owner-occupied versus renter-occupied dwellings
|
||
decreased slightly between 1990 and 2000. In 1990, 25.3% (449 units) of
|
||
the town’s total housing units were rental units versus 65.1% (1,154 units)
|
||
which were owner-occupied, The remaining 9.6% (170 units) were vacant
|
||
units. As of 2000, 29.4% (539 units) were rental units, while 60.5% (1,111
|
||
units) were identified as owner-occupied, with the remaining units 10.1%
|
||
(185 units) identified as vacant, seasonal or recreational.
|
||
|
||
The age of Tazewell’s housing stock isillustrated in Figure 3 and Table 2.10.
|
||
This type of data provides an indication of potential deficiencies in the
|
||
quality and safety of dwelling units. Older houses, manufactured homes
|
||
and multi-family units may have been constructed to lesser standards from
|
||
the perspective of building codes and life safety requirements. This can be
|
||
of particular concern in terms of maintenance and upkeep of older units in
|
||
order to retain them as standard housing units in the town's housing stock.
|
||
AAs the data in the table indicates, a significant portion of Tazewell’s housing
|
||
stock is aging. Approximately 60% of the town's housing units (1,082 units)
|
||
were built prior to 1970.
|
||
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
Page 26
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
Page 27
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 3
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.10 TOTAL HOUSING UNITS BY YEAR BUILT TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
Year Structure Built Total Units % of Total
|
||
|
||
|
||
2000 to 2010
|
||
|
||
1990 to 1999 1980 to 1989 1970 to 1979 1960 to 1969 1940 to 1959 1939 or earlier TOTAL
|
||
|
||
69
|
||
237 437 327 316 636 30 2,052
|
||
|
||
3.1%
|
||
10.5% 19.3% 14.5% 14.0% 28.2% 10.4% 100.0%
|
||
|
||
|
||
Given the age of the housing stock in Tazewell, the condition of the housing
|
||
units is generally good, however. Indicators normally associated with
|
||
substandard housing such as lack of complete plumbing facilities,
|
||
overcrowding , and the presence of sole heating fuel sources such as wood,
|
||
coal or coke are either non-existent or negligible. 2000 Census data reveals
|
||
that no housing units in the town lack complete plumbing facilities, no
|
||
rooms are overcrowded (i.e. over 1 occupant per room) and only 3% of the
|
||
houses use a heating source other than a standard source such as natural
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000
|
||
|
||
Hou
|
||
sing
|
||
|
||
Un
|
||
its
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
100
|
||
200
|
||
300
|
||
400
|
||
500
|
||
600
|
||
700
|
||
|
||
2000 to 2010 1980 to 1999 1960 to 1979 1940 to 1959 1939 orearlier
|
||
|
||
Town of TazewellAge of Housing Stock
|
||
|
||
Year Built
|
||
|
||
492
|
||
|
||
304
|
||
|
||
Town of Tazewell
|
||
Age of Housing Stock
|
||
|
||
492
|
||
700
|
||
|
||
600
|
||
|
||
500
|
||
400
|
||
300
|
||
200
|
||
100
|
||
|
||
°
|
||
|
||
2000 to 2010 1980 to 1999 1960 to 1979 1940t0 1958 1939 or
|
||
earlier
|
||
|
||
308
|
||
|
||
HE Housing Units
|
||
|
||
Year Built Figure 3
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.10 TOTAL HOUSING UNITS BY YEAR BUILT
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
Year Structure Built Total Units {of Total
|
||
2000 to 2010 69 3.1%
|
||
1990 to 1999 237 10.5%
|
||
1980 to 1989 437 19.3%
|
||
1970 to 1979 327 14.5%
|
||
1960 to 1969 316 14.0%
|
||
1940 to 1959 636 28.2%
|
||
1939 or earlier 30 10.4%
|
||
TOTAL 2,052 100.0%
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000
|
||
|
||
Given the age of the housing stock in Tazewell, the condition of the housing
|
||
Units is generally good, however. Indicators normally associated with
|
||
substandard housing such as lack of complete plumbing facilities,
|
||
overcrowding, and the presence of sole heating fuel sources such as wood,
|
||
coal or coke are either non-existent or negligible. 2000 Census data reveals
|
||
that no housing units in the town lack complete plumbing facilities, no
|
||
rooms are overcrowded (i.e. over 1 occupant per room) and only 3% of the
|
||
houses use a heating source other than a standard source such as.natural
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
a Page 27
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
Page 28
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
gas, LP gas, electricity or fuel oil. In addition, field surveys of housing
|
||
conditions in the Town conducted by K. W. Poore and Associates, Inc.
|
||
indicate that, with several exceptions, the physical condition of the housing
|
||
is generally standard or conservable, with minor repairs.
|
||
|
||
AFFORDABLE HOUSING Housing that is considered not affordable is often defined as housing that
|
||
costs, in monthly rent or mortgage payments, more than 30% of the
|
||
occupants’ household income. Based on 2000 Census data, approximately
|
||
32% of tenant- households pay 30% or more of their household incomes on
|
||
rent while approximately 28% of owner-occupied households pay 30% or
|
||
more of their household incomes on mortgage payments.
|
||
|
||
Another measure of affordability is the rule of thumb that a household can
|
||
afford to pay 2.5 times its annual household income. Based on 2000 Census
|
||
data, approximately 44% of households in the town earn less than the annual
|
||
median income of $28,510. Incomes below this level are not considered
|
||
able to afford the median priced house of $66,900.
|
||
|
||
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE This chapter of the comprehensive plan has presented an overview and
|
||
analysis of historical changes that have occurred in the town’s population
|
||
and housing over the last several decades. The discussion revealed a series
|
||
of changes and trends that will potentially affect Tazewell in the coming
|
||
years.
|
||
|
||
Population data reveals that growth in the region and the County has declined
|
||
in comparison to the previous decades of the 1970s and 1980s. Growth
|
||
projections for the next 20 years suggest that this trend is expected to
|
||
continue lacking any major economic stimulus, which is not expected within
|
||
the existing planning period.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s population has also undergone a similar slowing in terms of the
|
||
actual number of additional residents. Since Tazewell’s future population
|
||
growth is tied to that of the County, it is expected that the town will
|
||
experience a similar decline in population over the next 20 years. In
|
||
essence, the town is expected to reap a decreasing percentage of a slower
|
||
regional population growth. This is a trend which the town should monitor
|
||
closely over the next two decades in order to plan for community facilities
|
||
and community development activities.
|
||
|
||
Another population trend that will affect community development in the
|
||
future is the general aging of the population. This factor will affect the type
|
||
of services that the town may have to consider providing as well as the type
|
||
of housing alternatives that may be needed to accommodate changing
|
||
demographics within the area.
|
||
|
||
gas, LP gas, electricity or fuel oil. In addition, field surveys of housing
|
||
conditions in the Town conducted by K. W. Poore and Associates, Inc.
|
||
indicate that, with several exceptions, the physical condition of the housing
|
||
is generally standard or conservable, with minor repairs
|
||
|
||
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
|
||
|
||
Housing that is considered not affordable ‘is often defined as housing that
|
||
costs, in monthly rent or mortgage payments, more than 30% of the
|
||
‘occupants’ household income. Based on 2000 Census data, approximately
|
||
32% of tenant- households pay 30% or more of their household incomes on
|
||
|
||
rent while approximately 28% of owner-occupied households pay 30% or
|
||
more of their household incomes on mortgage payments.
|
||
|
||
Another measure of affordability is the rule of thumb that a household can
|
||
afford to pay 2.5 times its annual household income. Based on 2000 Census
|
||
data, approximately 44% of households in the town earn lessthan the annual
|
||
median income of $28,510. Incomes below this level are not considered
|
||
able to afford the median priced house of $66,900.
|
||
|
||
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE
|
||
|
||
This chapter of the comprehensive plan has presented an overview and
|
||
analysis of historical changes that have occurred in the town’s population
|
||
and housing over the last several decades. The discussion revealed a series
|
||
of changes and trends that will potentially affect Tazewell in the coming
|
||
years.
|
||
|
||
Population data reveals that growth in the region and the County has declined
|
||
in comparison to the previous decades of the 1970s and 1980s. Growth
|
||
projections for the next 20 years suggest that this trend is expected to
|
||
continue lacking any major economic stimulus, which is not expected within
|
||
the existing planning period.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s population has also undergone a similar slowing in terms of the
|
||
actual number of additional residents. Since Tazewell’s future population
|
||
growth is tied to that of the County, it is expected that the town will
|
||
experience a similar decline in population over the next 20 years. In
|
||
essence, the town is expected to reap a decreasing percentage of a slower
|
||
regional population growth. This is a trend which the town should monitor
|
||
closely over the next two decades in order to plan for community faci
|
||
and community development activities.
|
||
|
||
Another population trend that will affect community development in the
|
||
future is the general aging of the population. This factor will affect the type
|
||
of services that the town may have to consider providing as well as the type
|
||
of housingalternatives that may be needed to accommodate changing
|
||
demographics within the area.
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
Page 28 a
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POPULATION + HOUSING
|
||
Page 29
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Like the population, the town’s housing stock is aging. Coupled with this,
|
||
there is a need for more affordable housing. The town should seek funding
|
||
from a source such as the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
|
||
program, which provides zero-interest loans to rehabilitate aging, substandard
|
||
housing. In addition, adaptive reuse of commercial or institutional buildings
|
||
in the downtown as apartments for low-and moderate-income residents
|
||
should be promoted for development. Along with CDBG funding, the use
|
||
of historic and/or low-income housing tax credits should be encouraged for
|
||
rehabilitation of qualified buildings.
|
||
|
||
Like the population, the town's housing stock is aging. Coupled with this,
|
||
there is aneed for more affordable housing. The town should seek funding
|
||
from a source such as the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
|
||
program, which provides zero-interest loans to rehabilitate aging, substandard
|
||
housing. In addition, adaptive reuse of commercial or institutional buildings
|
||
in the downtown as apartments for low-and moderate-income residents
|
||
should be promoted for development. Along with CDBG funding, the use
|
||
of historic and/or low-income housing tax credits should be encouraged for
|
||
rehabilitation of qualified buildi
|
||
|
||
POPULATION +
|
||
HOUSING
|
||
|
||
Page 29
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 30
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
Just as changes in population and housing influence the current and future
|
||
development of land in a community, local and regional economic conditions
|
||
play an important role in shaping how the community looks and functions.
|
||
Although economic growth to a large extent is influenced by external factors
|
||
that are beyond the control of the community, there are factors the
|
||
community can influence. Creation of new jobs, attraction of private
|
||
investment, and incentives for expansion of existing businesses serve to
|
||
direct future development. In order to influence the direction of economic
|
||
and land use development, however, local officials, businesses and residents
|
||
need to be aware of regional and local economic characteristics and
|
||
conditions. This chapter presents trends and conditions in the town, county
|
||
and region.
|
||
|
||
WHAT WE DO FOR A LIVING
|
||
• The largest single employment category for residents of the town is in
|
||
|
||
educational, health and social services employment. The Tazewell County
|
||
School Board is the largest employer in the County.
|
||
|
||
|
||
• The Town and County have a higher percentage of residents in the labor
|
||
|
||
force employed and unemployed than other counties in the Cumberland
|
||
Plateau Planning District.
|
||
|
||
•Higher percentages of workers in the Town (16.2%) and the County
|
||
(18%), versus the region, out-commute to another state.
|
||
|
||
• In terms of actual taxable sales dollars, Tazewell County had the greatest
|
||
increase during the period between1999 to 2003 in comparison to other
|
||
counties in the region.
|
||
|
||
• Within the past decade, Town residents’ median household incomes have
|
||
experienced a decrease, whereas the region’s median household incomes
|
||
have increased.
|
||
|
||
• The Town has a higher percentage of residents who have lower incomes than
|
||
the County with approximately one-fifth of the town’s residents (20.6%)
|
||
living below the poverty line.
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
Just as changes in population and housing influence the current and future
|
||
development of land in a community, local and regional economic conditions
|
||
play animportant role in shaping how the community looks and functions.
|
||
Although economic growth to a large extent is influenced by external factors
|
||
that are beyond the control of the community, there are factors the
|
||
community can influence. Creation of new jobs, attraction of private
|
||
investment, and incentives for expansion of existing businesses serve to
|
||
direct future development. In order to influence the direction of economic
|
||
and land use development, however, local officials, businesses and residents
|
||
need to be aware of regional and local economic characteristics and
|
||
conditions. This chapter presents trends and conditions in the town, county
|
||
and region.
|
||
|
||
WHAT WE DO FOR ALIVING
|
||
|
||
The largest single employment category for residents of the town is in
|
||
|
||
educational, health and social services employment. The Tazewell County
|
||
School Board is the largest employer in the County.
|
||
|
||
The Town and County have a higher percentage of residents in the labor
|
||
force employed and unemployed than other counties in the Cumberland
|
||
Plateau Planning District.
|
||
|
||
Higher percentages of workers in the Town (16.2%) and the County
|
||
(18%), versus the region, out-commute to another state.
|
||
|
||
In terms of actual taxable sales dollars, Tazewell County had the greatest
|
||
increase during the period between1999 to 2003 in comparison to other
|
||
counties in the region.
|
||
|
||
Within the past decade, Town residents’ median household incomes have
|
||
experienced a decrease, whereas the region’s median household incomes
|
||
have increased.
|
||
|
||
The Town hasa higher percentage of residents who have lower incomes than
|
||
|
||
the County with approximately one-fifth of the town’s residents (20.6%)
|
||
living below the poverty line.
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
Page 30
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 31
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS Employment in the Town of Tazewell increased during the 1990’s. Total
|
||
employment has grown from 1,420 persons employed in 1990 to 1,612 in
|
||
2000, an increase of 13.5%. As illustrated in Table 2.11, the largest single
|
||
employment category in 2000 is educational, health and social services,
|
||
comprising 22.6% of Tazewell’s employment. This is not surprising given
|
||
the fact that the Town is the seat of county government and the location for
|
||
two elementary schools, a high school, a vocational/technical school, and
|
||
Tazewell Community Hospital just outside of the corporate limits. The second
|
||
largest employment category is retail trade, which comprises 14.7% of the
|
||
employment in the Town. The other employment categories range from
|
||
approximately 4-9% of the industry employment, with the exception of
|
||
information employment, which only constitutes 1.3% of the Town’s
|
||
employment
|
||
TABLE 2.11 EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY GROUP, 2010 TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
|
||
Industry Group Agriculture, forestry, fishing and
|
||
hunting , and mining
|
||
|
||
119
|
||
07%
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Construction 111 07%
|
||
Manufacturing 056 04%
|
||
Wholesale Trade 014 01%
|
||
Retail Trade 130 08%
|
||
Transportation, warehousing
|
||
and utilities
|
||
|
||
114 08%
|
||
|
||
Information 038 03%
|
||
Finance, insurance and real estate 093 06%
|
||
Professional, scientific, management
|
||
and administrative
|
||
|
||
086 06%
|
||
|
||
Educational, health and social services 470 30%
|
||
Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation 035 02%
|
||
|
||
and food services Other services (except public administration)
|
||
Public administration
|
||
TOTAL
|
||
|
||
S
|
||
o
|
||
u
|
||
r
|
||
c
|
||
e
|
||
:
|
||
U
|
||
|
||
Num
|
||
ber
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Per
|
||
cen
|
||
|
||
t
|
||
of T
|
||
|
||
ota
|
||
l
|
||
|
||
EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS
|
||
|
||
Employment in the Town of Tazewell increased during the 1990's. Total
|
||
‘employment has grown from 1,420 persons employed in 1990 to 1,612 in
|
||
2000, an increase of 13.5%. As illustrated in Table 2.11, the largest single
|
||
‘employment category in 2000 is educational, health and social services,
|
||
comprising 22.6% of Tazewell's employment. This is not surprising given
|
||
the fact that the Townis the seat of county government and the location for
|
||
two elementary schools, a high school, a vocationalitechnical school, and
|
||
Tazewell Community Hospital just outside of the corporate limits. The second
|
||
largest employment category is retail trade, which comprises 14.7% of the
|
||
employment in the Town. The other employment categories range from
|
||
approximately 4-9% of the industry employment, with the exception of
|
||
information employment, which only constitutes 1.3% of the Town's
|
||
‘employment
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.11 EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY GROUP, 2010
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
Industry Group i 5 é
|
||
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and 119 07%
|
||
hunting, and mining
|
||
|
||
Construction 11 (07%
|
||
Manufacturing 056 04%
|
||
Wholesale Trade. 014 01%
|
||
Retail Trade 130 08%
|
||
Transportation, warehousing 114 (08%
|
||
and utilities
|
||
|
||
Information 038 03%
|
||
Finance, insurance and real estate 093 06%
|
||
Professional, scientific, management 086 06%
|
||
and administrative
|
||
|
||
Educational, health and social services 470 30%
|
||
Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation 035, 02%
|
||
|
||
and food services
|
||
Other services (except public ad
|
||
|
||
Public administration
|
||
TOTAL
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC.
|
||
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
Page 31 —
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 32
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
s Bureau, Census 2010 120 200
|
||
|
||
07% 11% 100.0%
|
||
|
||
's Bureau, Census 2010
|
||
|
||
120 07%
|
||
200 11%
|
||
100.0%
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 32
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 33
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
MAJOR EMPLOYERS A list of the Top 25 employers in Tazewell County reflects the dominance
|
||
of retail and service sector employment in the area. As Table 2.12 reveals,
|
||
seven of the top ten employers are educational, health, or social services
|
||
related employers. The other employers in the top ten (Wal-Mart, Magic
|
||
Mart and Food City) are retail employers. By contrast, only three employers
|
||
in the top 25 are manufacturers (Pyott-Boone Electronics, Inc., Joy
|
||
Technologies, Inc. and Pemco Corp.)
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.12 TOP 25 EMPLOYERS -- TAZEWELL PLANNING AREA
|
||
Rank 01
|
||
02
|
||
03
|
||
04
|
||
05
|
||
06
|
||
07
|
||
08
|
||
09
|
||
10
|
||
11
|
||
12
|
||
13
|
||
14
|
||
15
|
||
16
|
||
17
|
||
18
|
||
19
|
||
20
|
||
21
|
||
22
|
||
23
|
||
24
|
||
25
|
||
|
||
Name Tazewell County School Board
|
||
Wal-Mart/Sam’s Club
|
||
Clinch Valley Community Hospital
|
||
Southwest Virginia Community College
|
||
Clinch Valley Community Action
|
||
Bluefield College
|
||
Tazewell County
|
||
Magic Mart
|
||
Food City
|
||
Appalachian Agency for Seniors
|
||
Pyott Boone Electronics
|
||
Heritage Hall Health Care
|
||
McDonald’s
|
||
Emats, Inc
|
||
Joy Technologies
|
||
Tazewell Community Hospital
|
||
Clinch Valley Physicians
|
||
Lowe’s
|
||
Bluefield Beverage
|
||
VDOT
|
||
Preferred Home Health Services
|
||
Marshall Miller & Associates, Inc.
|
||
Town of Bluefield
|
||
Pemco Corporation
|
||
Gasco Drilling
|
||
|
||
Type of Employer
|
||
Local Government
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
State Government
|
||
Local Government
|
||
Private
|
||
Local Government
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Local Government
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
State Government
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
Local Government
|
||
Private
|
||
Private
|
||
|
||
26 Simmons Group Private
|
||
Source: Virginia Employment Commission, Covered Employment & Wages, 4th Qt r. 2004
|
||
|
||
MAJOR EMPLOYERS
|
||
|
||
A list of the Top 25 employers in Tazewell County reflects the dominance
|
||
of retail and service sector employment in the area. As Table 2.12 reveals,
|
||
seven of the top ten employers are educational, health, or social services
|
||
related employers. The other employers in the top ten (Wal-Mart, Magic
|
||
Mart and Food City) are retail employers. By contrast, only three employers
|
||
in the top 25 are manufacturers (Pyott-Boone Electronics, Inc., Joy
|
||
Technologies, Inc. and Pemco Corp.)
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.12 TOP 25 EMPLOYERS -- TAZEWELL PLANNING AREA
|
||
Rank | Name Type of Employer
|
||
01 | Tazewell County School Board Local Government
|
||
02 | Wal-Mart/Sam’s Club Private
|
||
|
||
03 | Clinch Valley Community Hospital Private
|
||
|
||
04 | SouthwestVirginia Community College | State Government
|
||
05 | Clinch Valley Community Action Local Government
|
||
06 | Bluefield College Private
|
||
|
||
07 | Tazewell County Local Government
|
||
08 | Magic Mart Private
|
||
|
||
09 | Food city Private
|
||
|
||
10 | Appalachian Agency for Seniors Local Government
|
||
11_| Pyott Boone Electronics Private
|
||
|
||
12 _ | Heritage Hall Health Care Private
|
||
|
||
13 | McDonald's Private
|
||
|
||
14° | Emats, nc Private
|
||
|
||
15 _ | Joy Technologies Private
|
||
|
||
16 | Tazewell Community Hospital Private
|
||
|
||
17 | Clinch Valley Physicians Private
|
||
|
||
18 | Lowe's Private
|
||
|
||
19 | Bluefield Beverage Private
|
||
|
||
20 | voor State Government
|
||
21 | Preferred Home Health Services Private
|
||
|
||
22 | Marshall Miller & Associates, Inc. Private
|
||
|
||
23 | Town of Bluefield Local Government
|
||
24 | Pemco Corporation Private
|
||
|
||
25 | Gasco Drilling Private
|
||
|
||
26 Simmons Group Private
|
||
|
||
‘Source: Virginia Employment Commission, Covered Employment & Wages, 4°". 2004
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 33
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 34
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Population
|
||
16 yrs. &
|
||
over
|
||
|
||
Civilian
|
||
Labor
|
||
|
||
Number
|
||
%
|
||
|
||
Number
|
||
%
|
||
|
||
Force Employed Employed Unemployed Unemployed
|
||
3,946
|
||
|
||
2,085 1,551 61.0%
|
||
534 3.9%
|
||
|
||
43,452
|
||
17,088 13,482 50.4%
|
||
|
||
3,476 8.0%
|
||
28,897
|
||
|
||
11,418 10,869 63.6%
|
||
765 6.7%
|
||
|
||
15,308
|
||
5,034 4,530 38.8%
|
||
|
||
1,530 10.1%
|
||
23106 7,679 7,253 69.1% 426 5.0%
|
||
|
||
|
||
LABOR FORCE CHARACTERISTICS The labor force is defined as all persons who either are employed or are
|
||
receiving unemployment compensation. Table 2.13 below shows the
|
||
distribution of the Town, the County and the region’s residents aged 16 and
|
||
above working in 2000. The Town and County had higher percentages of
|
||
residents who are employed than do the other counties in the Cumberland
|
||
Plateau PDC. By the same token, the Town and County also have higher
|
||
percentages of the labor force unemployed than do the other counties in
|
||
the region. In 2000, 12.4% of the town’s residents 16 years and over were
|
||
unemployed and considered to be seeking work, while countywide slightly
|
||
fewer than 5% were unemployed.
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.13 REGIONAL LABOR FORCE EMPLOYMENT STATUS - 2000
|
||
Tazewell,
|
||
Town
|
||
Tazewell
|
||
County
|
||
Russell Co.
|
||
Dickenson
|
||
Co. Buchanan
|
||
Co.
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010
|
||
|
||
The size of the labor force, its distribution by industry and how it is employed
|
||
are important factors to consider when planning for future economic
|
||
development. The plans for a new business or the expansion of an already
|
||
existing one must be based on the assessment of available labor, in addition
|
||
to the potential consumer market. For the town, the high unemployment
|
||
rate indicates that there is sufficient available labor to fill existing and new
|
||
employment opportunities in the area.
|
||
|
||
COMMUTING PATTERNS
|
||
Commuting patterns measure daily travel between places of residence and
|
||
employment locations. To be classified as a commuter, a worker must
|
||
cross at least one political boundary between home and work. As shown
|
||
|
||
LABOR FORCE CHARACTERISTICS
|
||
|
||
The labor force is defined as all persons who either are employed or are
|
||
receiving unemployment compensation. Table 2.13 below shows the
|
||
distribution of the Town, the County and the region's residents aged 16 and
|
||
above working in 2000. The Town and County had higher percentages of
|
||
residents who are employed than do the other counties in the Cumberland
|
||
Plateau PDC. By the same token, the Town and County also have higher
|
||
percentages of the labor force unemployed than do the other counties in
|
||
the region. In 2000, 12.4% of the town's residents 16 years and over were
|
||
unemployed and considered to be seeking work, while countywide slightly
|
||
fewer than 5% were unemployed.
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.13 REGIONAL LABOR FORCE EMPLOYMENT STATUS - 2000
|
||
Population CWvilan
|
||
46 yrs, Labor Number % Number %
|
||
over Force Employed Employed Unemployed Unemployed
|
||
Tazewell, 2,085 1.551 534
|
||
Town 3,946 | 55° 61.0% 3.9%
|
||
Tazewell | 43,452 17,088 13,482 50.4% 3,476 8.0%
|
||
County
|
||
Russell Co. | 28,897 11,418 10,869 63.6% 765 6.7%
|
||
Dickenson
|
||
Co. 15,308 «5,034 4,530 «38.8% 1,530 10.1%
|
||
ecchanan | 2106 7.679 7,253 89.1% 426, 5.0%
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
‘Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010
|
||
|
||
The size of the labor force, its distribution by industry and how it is employed
|
||
are important factors to consider when planning for future economic
|
||
development. The plans for a new business or the expansion of an already
|
||
existing one must be based on the assessment of available labor, in addition
|
||
to the potential consumer market. Forthe town, the high unemployment
|
||
rate indicates that there is sufficient available labor to 1g and new
|
||
‘employment opportunities in the area.
|
||
|
||
COMMUTING PATTERNS
|
||
|
||
‘Commuting patterns measure daily travel between places of residence and
|
||
employment locations. To be classified as a commuter, a worker must
|
||
cross at least one political boundary between home and work. As shown
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC.
|
||
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
Page 34
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 35
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
in Table 2.14, higher percentages of workers in the Town (16.2%) and the
|
||
County (18%), versus the region, out-commute to another state. Convenient
|
||
access to US 460 and the proximity of job centers in West Virginia contribute
|
||
to the out-commuting in the Tazewell area. Tazewell, in effect, is not only
|
||
competing against counties in the region for employment but also against
|
||
another state. In order for the Town and County to reverse this trend, an
|
||
ongoing effort to attract quality jobs to the area, should be the focus of
|
||
economic development initiatives by both jurisdictions.
|
||
TABLE 2.14 PLACE OF WORK BY WORKERS TOWN OF TAZEWELL AND SURROUNDING COUNTIES
|
||
|
||
Total
|
||
number
|
||
|
||
employed
|
||
|
||
|
||
Worked in
|
||
|
||
state of
|
||
residence
|
||
|
||
|
||
Worked
|
||
|
||
outside state
|
||
of residence
|
||
|
||
% worked
|
||
outside of
|
||
|
||
state of
|
||
residence
|
||
|
||
|
||
Worked in
|
||
county of
|
||
residence
|
||
|
||
Worked
|
||
outside
|
||
|
||
county of
|
||
residence
|
||
|
||
% worked
|
||
outside of
|
||
county of
|
||
residence
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tazewell, Town
|
||
Tazewell County
|
||
Russell County
|
||
Dickenson County
|
||
Buchanan County
|
||
|
||
1,551
|
||
16,889 10,458 5,608
|
||
7,134
|
||
|
||
1,294 13,511
|
||
10,018 5,423 6,506
|
||
|
||
248
|
||
2,871 439 185
|
||
628
|
||
|
||
16.6%
|
||
17% 4.2% 3.3%
|
||
8.8%
|
||
|
||
1,182
|
||
12,058 5,250 3,359
|
||
5,037
|
||
|
||
112
|
||
1,976 4,769 2,058
|
||
1,470
|
||
|
||
11.7% 45.6% 36.7%
|
||
20.6%
|
||
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010
|
||
TAXABLE SALES Taxable sales are one of the few available economic indicators of the actual
|
||
size and growth of a region. The Virginia Department of Taxation does not
|
||
provide information on taxable sales for towns, however. As a political
|
||
jurisdiction within the county, the town’s businesses contribute to the total
|
||
taxable sales for the county. Table 2.15 shows total taxable sales for the
|
||
four counties in the region. All figures are in real dollars, not adjusted for
|
||
inflation, and represent only taxable sales. From 1999 to 2014, total taxable
|
||
sales in Tazewell County increased by approximately 37 percent. By contrast,
|
||
total taxable sales for Dickenson County increased only slightly (33%) and
|
||
for Buchanan County taxable sales increased (20%). Russell County had the
|
||
second largest percentage increase in taxable sales during the period (35%).
|
||
In terms of actual taxable sales dollars, however, Tazewell County had the
|
||
greatest increase during the period with approximately $82 million in sales.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
7.2%
|
||
|
||
in Table 2.14, higher percentages of workers in the Town (16.2%) and the
|
||
County (18%), versus the region, out-commute to another state. Convenient
|
||
access to US 460 and the proximity of job centers in West Virginia contribute
|
||
to the out-commuting in the Tazewell area. Tazewell, in effect, is not only
|
||
‘competing against counties in the region for employment but also against
|
||
another state. In order for the Town and County to reverse this trend, an
|
||
‘ongoing effort to attract quality jobs to the area, should be the focus of
|
||
economic development initiatives by both jurisdictions,
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.14 PLACE OF WORK BYWORKERS TOWN OF TAZEWELL AND SURROUNDING COUNTIES
|
||
|
||
% worked Worked —% worked
|
||
|
||
Total Workedin Worked gutsige of Worked in outside outside of
|
||
|
||
number state of outside stato state of | COUMLY OF countyof — countyof
|
||
|
||
employed residence ofresidence recigence T@SiSENCE residence residence
|
||
Tazewell, Town 1,551 1,294 248 16.6% 1,182 112 7.2%
|
||
Tazewell County | 16,889 13,511 2871 17% 12,058 1,976 11.7%
|
||
Russell County 10,458 10,018 439 42% 5,250 4,769 45.6%
|
||
Dickenson County | 5,608 5,423 185 3.3% 3,359 2,058 36.7%
|
||
Buchanan County 7,134 6,508 628 88% 5,037 1,470 20.6%
|
||
|
||
‘Source: U.S, Census Bureau, Census 2010
|
||
|
||
TAXABLE SALES
|
||
|
||
Taxable sales are one of the few available economic indicators of the actual
|
||
size and growth of aregion. The Virginia Department of Taxation does not
|
||
provide information on taxable sales for towns, however. As a political
|
||
jurisdiction within the county, the town's businesses contribute to the total
|
||
taxable sales for the county. Table2.15 shows total taxable sales for the
|
||
four counties in the region. All figures are in real dollars, not adjusted for
|
||
inflation, and represent only taxable sales. From 1999 to 2014, total taxable
|
||
sales in Tazewell County increased by approximately 37 percent. By contrast,
|
||
total taxable sales for Dickenson County increased only slightly (33%) and
|
||
for Buchanan County taxable sales increased (20%). Russell County had the
|
||
‘second largest percentage increase in taxable sales during the period (35%).
|
||
In terms of actual taxable sales dollars, however, Tazewell County had the
|
||
greatestincrease during the period with approximately $82 million in sales.
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
= Page 35
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 35
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
INCOME AND POVERTY STATUS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Income and poverty levels are another important measurement used to
|
||
gauge social and economic conditions. While it is recognized that creating
|
||
and retaining jobs is vital to the growth and development of a community,
|
||
equally important is the income that is derived from this employment.
|
||
Income determines how much people spend and fixes the limits on the
|
||
kinds of goods and services they are able to buy. In turn, spending , as
|
||
determined by disposable income, influences economic activity, particularly
|
||
that of the local retail/service sectors. A community ’s capacity to expand
|
||
and develop, therefore, is affected by the income and spending patterns of
|
||
its residents and whether or not the incomes are sufficient to support future
|
||
economic investment and growth.
|
||
|
||
In comparison to the region, Table 2.16 reveals that median household
|
||
income for the Town remains higher than the other jurisdictions. Within
|
||
the past decade, however, the Town’s median household income has
|
||
experienced a decrease, whereas the region’s median household incomes
|
||
have increased. This may be due in part to the fact that there are older
|
||
residents in the Town who have retired and are living on fixed incomes.
|
||
Table 2.17 also demonstrates that the Town has a high percentage of residents
|
||
who have lower incomes with approximately one-fifth of the town’s residents
|
||
(20.6%) living below the poverty line.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.15 TAXABLE SALES BY COUNTY IN THE CUMBERLAND PLATEAU PDC
|
||
|
||
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2014
|
||
Tazewell County $379,024,928 $409,177,303 $414,883,974 $421,810,028 $439,228,897 $521,246,767
|
||
Russell County $104,231,839 $107,862,419 $101,878,423 $122,525,574 $129,188,820 $159,893,054
|
||
|
||
Dickenson County $46,924,293 $48,398,260 $47,977,617 $49,531,310 $50,249,767 $69,962,263
|
||
Buchanan County $118,238,897 $115,923,478 $114,597,950 $114,720,922 $112,152,118 $147,726,232
|
||
|
||
INCOME AND POVERTY STATUS
|
||
|
||
‘TABLE 2.15 TAXABLE SALES BY COUNTY IN THE CUMBERLAND PLATEAU PDC
|
||
|
||
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2014
|
||
anes '$379,024,928 | $409,177,303 | $414,883,974 | $421,810,028 | $439,228,897 | $521,246,767
|
||
cee $104,231,839 | $107,862,419 | $101,878,423 | $122,525,574 | $129,188,820 | $159,893,054
|
||
on" $46,924,293 | $48,398,260 | $47,977,617 | $49,531,310 | $50,249,767 | $69,962,263
|
||
aie $118,238,897 | $115,923,478 | $14,597,950 | $14,720,922 | $12,152,118 | $147,726,232
|
||
|
||
Income and poverty levels are another important measurement used to
|
||
gauge social and economic conditions. While it is recognized that creating
|
||
and retaining jobs is vital to the growth and development of a community,
|
||
equally important is the income that is derived from this employment.
|
||
Income determines how much people spend and fixes the limits on the
|
||
kinds of goods and services they are able to buy. In turn, spending, as
|
||
determined by disposable income, influences economic activity, particularly
|
||
that of the local retail/service sectors. A community's capacity to expand
|
||
and develop, therefore, is affected by the income and spending patterns of
|
||
its residents and whether or not the incomes are sufficient to support future
|
||
economic investment and growth.
|
||
|
||
In comparison to the region, Table 2.16 reveals that median household
|
||
income for the Town remains higher than the other jurisdictions. Within
|
||
the past decade, however, the Town's median household income has
|
||
experienced a decrease, whereas the region's median household incomes
|
||
have increased. This may be due in part to the fact that there are older
|
||
residents in the Town who have retired and are living on fixed incomes.
|
||
Table 2.17 also demonstrates that the Town hasa high percentage of residents
|
||
who have lower incomes with approximately one-fifth of the town's residents
|
||
(20.6%) living below the poverty line.
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
Page 35 =
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1990 , 2000 and 2013
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.17 INDIVIDUALS BELOW POVERTY LINE 1989, 1999 AND 2009
|
||
1989 % of
|
||
|
||
population 1999 Percent of
|
||
population 2009 % of
|
||
|
||
population
|
||
Town of
|
||
Tazewell 628 15.7% 813 20.6% 770 17.4%
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tazewell
|
||
County 8,609 19% 6,739 15.3% 7942 18.3%
|
||
Russell
|
||
County 6,370 22.5% 7,727 16.3% 5,471 19.3%
|
||
Dickenson
|
||
County 4,518 25.9% 3,460 21.3% 3243 20.9%
|
||
Buchanan
|
||
County 6,770 102.% 5,970 23.2% 5,924 25.9%
|
||
Virginia 611,611 102.% 656,641 9.6% 887,595 11.3%
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1990 , 2000 and 2009
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.16 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 1989-2013
|
||
1989 1999 2013 % CHANGE 1989 to 2013
|
||
|
||
Town of Tazewell 33,328 28510 30477 -9%
|
||
Tazewell County 19,670 27,304 35693 82%
|
||
Russell County 17,853 26,834 33872 90%
|
||
|
||
Dickenson County 16,292 23,431 33,318 104%
|
||
Buchanan County 19,851 22,213 29,848 51%
|
||
|
||
Virginia 33,328 46,677 63,907 92%
|
||
|
||
36
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.16 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 1989-2013
|
||
|
||
1989 1999 2013 1% CHANGE 1989 to 2013
|
||
Town of Tazewell | 33,328 28510 30477 -9%
|
||
Tazewell County | 19,670 27,304 35693 82%
|
||
|
||
Russell County 17,853 26,834 33872 90%
|
||
Dickenson County | 16,292 23,431 33,318 104%
|
||
Buchanan County | 19,851 22,213 29,848 51%
|
||
|
||
Virginia 33,328 46,677 63,907 92%
|
||
|
||
‘Source: U.S, Census Bureau, Census 1990 , 2000 and 2013,
|
||
|
||
TABLE 2.17 INDIVIDUALS BELOW POVERTY LINE 1989, 1999 AND 2009
|
||
eae 628 15.7% 813 20.6% 770 14
|
||
Gany | 8.609 19% 6739 | 153% | 7942 18.3%
|
||
eeeeey 6370 | 225% | 7,727 | 163% | saz1 19.3%
|
||
Cony 4518 25.9% 3,460 21.3% 3243 20.9%
|
||
Com” | 6,770 102% | 5970 | 23.2% | 5924 | 25.9%
|
||
Wronia | erre11 | 102% | 656641 | 9.6% | 887,505 | 11.9%
|
||
|
||
Source: US. Census Bureau, Census 1990, 2000 and 2009
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC.
|
||
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
— Page 36
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TOURISM For Tazewell County, tourism has historically been an important source of
|
||
revenue and employment. Attractions such as the Historic Crab Orchard
|
||
Museum and Pioneer Park, Burke’s Garden and the Pocahontas Exhibition
|
||
Coal Mine have drawn and will continue to draw visitors to the area.
|
||
|
||
In comparison to the other counties in the Cumberland Plateau Planning
|
||
District, Tazewell has received over twice as much in traveler spending as
|
||
the next closest County. In 2008, for example, Tazewell received $44
|
||
million in traveler spending as compared to $17.5 million for Buchanan County,
|
||
$6.5 million for Dickenson County and $10.3 million for Russell County.
|
||
In terms of direct travel employment, Tazewell led the region in 2008,
|
||
as well, with 580 jobs as compared to Buchanan with 204, Dickenson with
|
||
74 and Russell with 140 travel specific jobs.
|
||
|
||
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE The Town’s economic development strategy needs to take full advantage of
|
||
the many assets and resources of the community. In particular, employment in
|
||
the educational and health services sector should be promoted given the
|
||
existing base of workers already present in these fields. Given the aging
|
||
population in the area and the need to train workers for technology-based
|
||
employment, Tazewell residents serve as source of potential workers for new
|
||
or expanding businesses in these employment sectors.
|
||
In cooperation with County, the Town should develop strategies to recruit
|
||
“clean” industries to the area such as corporate headquarters, professional
|
||
offices, health-care facilities, training centers and lodging/conference
|
||
facilities. These types of employers not only have the potential to increase
|
||
workers’ incomes and the area’s tax base, but also will minimize the impact
|
||
on the natural environment of Tazewell. In addition to attracting new
|
||
employers to the area, strategies should be developed to retain the small
|
||
businesses already existing in the community.
|
||
Continued growth in tourism employment is anticipated and should be
|
||
fostered by town, county and regional economic development organizations.
|
||
There is an ample supply of workers in the area to serve tourism-related
|
||
businesses, and there is an availability of various funding sources to the
|
||
County such as the Tobacco Commission, the Appalachian Regional
|
||
Commission and the Virginia Coalfield Economic Development Authority
|
||
that provide grants and loans for tourism capital improvements.
|
||
One of the challenges for the Town in the future is to identify appropriate
|
||
sites for business development. Availability of public water and sewer and
|
||
easy access to US 19/460 are several of the criteria that should be considered
|
||
|
||
37
|
||
|
||
TOURISM
|
||
|
||
For Tazewell County, tourism has historically been an important source of
|
||
revenue and employment. Attractions such as the Historic Crab Orchard
|
||
Museum and Pioneer Park, Burke's Garden and the Pocahontas Exhibition
|
||
Coal Mine have drawn and will continue to draw visitors to the area
|
||
|
||
In comparison to the other counties in the Cumberland Plateau Planning
|
||
District, Tazewell has received over twice as much in traveler spending as
|
||
the next closest County. In 2008, for example, Tazewell received $44
|
||
million in traveler spending as compared to $17.5 million for Buchanan County,
|
||
$6.5 million for Dickenson County and $10.3 million for Russell County.
|
||
In terms of direct travel employment, Tazewell led the region in 2008,
|
||
as well, with 580 jobs as compared to Buchanan with 204, Dickenson with
|
||
74 and Russell with 140 travel specific jobs.
|
||
|
||
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE
|
||
|
||
The Town's economic development strategy needs to take full advantage of
|
||
the many assets and resources of the community. In particular, employment in
|
||
the educational and health services sector should be promoted given the
|
||
existing base of workers already present in these fields. Given the aging
|
||
population in the area and the need to train workers for technology-based
|
||
‘employment, Tazewell residents serve as source of potential workers for new
|
||
or expanding businesses in these employment sectors.
|
||
|
||
In cooperation with County, the Town should develop strategies to recruit
|
||
“clean” industries to the area such as corporate headquarters, professional
|
||
offices, health-care facilities, training centers and lodging/conference
|
||
facilities. These types of employers not only have the potential to increase
|
||
workers’ incomes and the area's tax base, but also will minimize the impact
|
||
on the natural environment of Tazewell. In addition to attracting new
|
||
‘employers to the area, strategies should be developed to retain the small
|
||
businesses already existing in the community.
|
||
|
||
Continued growth in tourism employment is anticipated and should be
|
||
fostered by town, county and regional economic development organizations.
|
||
Theres an ample supply of workers in the area to serve tourism-related
|
||
businesses, and there is an availability of various funding sources to the
|
||
County such as the Tobacco Commission, the Appalachian Regional
|
||
Commission and the Virginia Coalfield Economic Development Authority
|
||
that provide grants and loans for tourism capital improvements.
|
||
|
||
One of the challenges for the Town in the future is to identify appropriate
|
||
sites for business development. Availability of public water and sewer and
|
||
easy access to US 19/460 are several of the criteria that should be considered
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC.
|
||
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page 37
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
Page
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
when selecting sites. In addition, factors such as soil suitability, percent of
|
||
slope, ridgeline protection, and impacts on wetlands and floodplains should
|
||
be evaluated. Areas that could potentially serve as sites for offices, lodging/
|
||
conference facilities and health-care facilities include the areas in proximity to
|
||
the US 19/460 interchanges at Riverside Drive and Fairground Road as well
|
||
as along Maplewood Avenue and Ben Bolt Avenue. In order for this to occur,
|
||
however, it will require changes in existing zoning .
|
||
|
||
38
|
||
|
||
when selecting sites. In addition, factors such as soil suitability, percent of
|
||
slope, ridgeline protection, and impacts on wetlands and floodplains should
|
||
be evaluated. Areas that could potentially serve as sites for offices, lodging/
|
||
conference facilities and health-care facilities include the areas in proximity to
|
||
the US 19/460 interchanges at Riverside Drive and Fairground Road as well
|
||
as along Maplewood Avenue and Ben Bolt Avenue. In order for this to occur,
|
||
however, it will require changes in existing zoning.
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC
|
||
CONDITIONS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY FACILITIES &
|
||
SERVICES
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
SERVICES
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY FACILITIES &
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY FACILITIES+
|
||
SERVICES
|
||
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION The community facilities of the Town of Tazewell comprise buildings, lands,
|
||
and services that serve its residents, businesses and institutions. Examples
|
||
of community facilities include fire stations and police departments, parks,
|
||
hospitals, schools, and libraries. In addition, the Town provides public services
|
||
such as water distribution, sewage treatment, solid waste collection and
|
||
disposal, and street maintenance. Together, these facilities and services
|
||
are often referred to as the infrastructure of the Town.
|
||
|
||
By providing community facilities and services, Tazewell has the ability to
|
||
influence future development in the area. It is often the case that households,
|
||
businesses, and industries consider the availability of these facilities as a
|
||
factor in deciding where to locate. Because private development tends to
|
||
follow the location, quantity, and quality of public services, advance planning
|
||
of community facilities should be coordinated with land use, economic
|
||
development, housing , and transportation objectives. Such an effort will
|
||
help to determine community facilities needs now and in the future, as
|
||
well as the means to finance projects, set timetables, and identify desirable
|
||
locations for facilities.
|
||
|
||
This chapter summarizes key community facilities serving the Tazewell area.
|
||
Each summary includes a description of existing conditions with general
|
||
references to future needs. The Community Facilities Map identifies the
|
||
location of community facilities within the area.
|
||
|
||
EMERGENCY SERVICES AND PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DEPARTMENT
|
||
The Tazewell Volunteer Fire Department is currently comprised of (25)
|
||
trained volunteer fire fighters with the capacity for thirty (30) volunteers.
|
||
The fire department’s responsibilities include fire suppression, extrication,
|
||
fire prevention and education, community activities support (4th of July
|
||
fireworks), and limited Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Hazardous
|
||
Materials (HAZMAT) response duties. There are eight (8) officers responsible
|
||
for overseeing fire suppression operations.
|
||
|
||
●Fire Chief ●Assistant Fire Chief
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Fire Department
|
||
Headquarters
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
Page 39
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY FACILITIES+
|
||
SERVICES
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
The community facilities of the Town of Tazewell comprise buildings, lands,
|
||
and services that serve its residents, businesses and institutions. Examples
|
||
of community facilities include fire stations and police departments, parks,
|
||
hospitals, schools, and libraries. In addition, the Town provides public services
|
||
‘such as water distribution, sewage treatment, solid waste collection and
|
||
disposal, and street maintenance. Together, these facilities and services
|
||
are often referred to as the infrastructure of the Town
|
||
|
||
By providing community facilities and services, Tazewell has the ability to
|
||
influence future development in the area. Itisoften the case that households,
|
||
businesses, and industries consider the availability of these facilities as a
|
||
factor in deciding where to locate. Because private development tends to
|
||
follow the location, quantity, and quality of public services, advance planning
|
||
‘of community facilities should be coordinated with land use, economic
|
||
development, housing, and transportation objectives. Such an effort will
|
||
help to determine community facilities needs now and in the future, as
|
||
well as the means to finance projects, settimetables, and identify desirable
|
||
locations for facilities.
|
||
|
||
This chapter summarizes key community facilities serving the Tazewell area.
|
||
Each summary includes a description of existing conditions with general
|
||
references to future needs. The Community Facilities Map identifies the
|
||
location of community facilities within the area.
|
||
|
||
EMERGENCY SERVICES AND PUBLIC SAFETY
|
||
|
||
FIRE DEPARTMENT
|
||
|
||
The Tazewell Volunteer Fire Department is currently comprised of (25)
|
||
trained volunteer fire fighters with the capacity for thirty (30) volunteers.
|
||
The fire department's responsibilities include fire suppression, extrication,
|
||
fire prevention and education, community activities support (4" of July
|
||
fireworks), and limited Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Hazardous
|
||
Materials (HAZMAT) response duties. There are eight (8) officers responsible
|
||
for overseeing fire suppression operations.
|
||
|
||
Fire Chief
|
||
|
||
‘Assistant Fire Chief
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Fire Department
|
||
Headquarters
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 39
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
●(2) Captains ●Chief Engineer ●(4) Lieutenants In addition, there are three administrative positions in the fire department
|
||
(Chaplain, Secretary and Treasurer). The firefighting equipment is housed in a facility built in 1994. The building
|
||
is located on Main Street immediately west of the downtown. In addition to
|
||
three truck bays, the building has offices for the chief, a meeting room, and
|
||
equipment storage. Current equipment includes an aerial tower, three
|
||
pumpers, Haz-Mat Trailer, one personnel and equipment truck, one van,
|
||
and the chief’s car.
|
||
|
||
The volunteer company serves all of the town and portions of surrounding
|
||
Tazewell County. In addition to the Town’s Fire Department, there is a
|
||
county owned and operated fire department within the Town’s corporate
|
||
limits on Fairground Road that works in cooperation with the Town, if needed.
|
||
Emergency fire, rescue and police calls are dispatched for the town and
|
||
county through the County ’s 911 emergency number center.
|
||
|
||
In 2004, the Tazewell fire department answered 139 calls, which was an
|
||
increase of 19% over the past three years. The bulk of the department’s
|
||
budget is funded through the town. The department also receives private
|
||
donations through various fund raising activities.
|
||
|
||
The Insurance Services Offices (ISO) rating of the Tazewell Volunteer Fire
|
||
Department is “5”. This classification determines fire insurance rates for
|
||
properties within the fire service district. The response time for being on
|
||
the scene is a maximum of six to seven minutes for the furthest point in
|
||
town from the fire station.
|
||
|
||
Future Needs The Town purchased a 2003 Ferrera pumper for the Department in 2002.
|
||
While this met an immediate need, the Town needs to establish a regular
|
||
rotation and capital funding for the purchase of replacement firefighting
|
||
equipment. Future purchases might include:
|
||
• The 1979 American LaFrance mini-pumper was replaced with a Pierce
|
||
|
||
Rescue Engine (a 1000 gal Tank and 150 gpm pump.)
|
||
Ferrara - First Response Vehicle
|
||
|
||
• The replacement of the American LaFrance pumper with a new pumper by 2015. • The replacement of the 2003 Ferrera pumper with a new pumper by 2025.
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 40
|
||
|
||
Ferrara - First Response Vehicle
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIE:
|
||
|
||
Page 40
|
||
|
||
¢(2) Captains
|
||
Chief Engineer
|
||
(4) Lieutenants
|
||
|
||
In addition, there are three administrative positions in the fire department
|
||
(Chaplain, Secretary and Treasurer).
|
||
|
||
The firefighting equipment is housed in a facility built in 1994. The building
|
||
is located on Main Street immediately west of the downtown. In addition to
|
||
three truck bays, the building has offices for the chief, a meeting room, and
|
||
equipment storage. Current equipment includes an aerial tower, three
|
||
pumpers, Haz-Mat Trailer, one personnel and equipment truck, one van,
|
||
and the chief's car.
|
||
|
||
The volunteer company serves all of the town and portions of surrounding
|
||
Tazewell County. In addition to the Town's Fire Department, there is a
|
||
county owned and operated fire department within the Town's corporate
|
||
limits on Fairground Road that works in cooperation with the Town, ifneeded.
|
||
Emergency fire, rescue and police calls are dispatched for the town and
|
||
county through the County's 911 emergency number center.
|
||
|
||
In 2004, the Tazewell fire department answered 139 calls, which was an
|
||
increase of 19% over the past three years. The bulk of the department's
|
||
budget is funded through the town. The department also receives private
|
||
donations through various fund raising activities.
|
||
|
||
The Insurance Services Offices (ISO) rating of the Tazewell Volunteer Fire
|
||
Department is “5”. This classification determines fire insurance rates for
|
||
properties within the fire service district. The response time for being on
|
||
the scene is a maximum of six to seven minutes for the furthest point in
|
||
town from the fire station.
|
||
|
||
Future Needs
|
||
|
||
The Town purchased a 2003 Ferrera pumper for the Department in 2002.
|
||
While this met an immediate need, the Town needs to establish a regular
|
||
rotation and capital funding for the purchase of replacement firefighting
|
||
‘equipment. Future purchases might include:
|
||
|
||
+ The 1979 American LaFrance mini-pumper was replaced with a Pierce
|
||
Rescue Engine (a 1000 gal Tank and 150 gpm pump.)
|
||
|
||
+ Thereplacementof the American LaFrance pumper with a new pumperby 2015.
|
||
+ Thereplacement of the 2003 Ferrera pumper with anew pumper by 2025.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL. VIRGINIA
|
||
14
|
||
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
01. Town Municipal /Bldg & Police Department
|
||
02. Town Shop
|
||
03. Tazewell Volunteer Fire Department
|
||
04. Tazewell County Courthouse & Jail
|
||
05. Tazewell County Public Library
|
||
06. Tazewell County Senior Citizen Center
|
||
07. Tazewell County Administration Building
|
||
08. Tazewell High School
|
||
09. Vocational Center
|
||
10. Tazewell PSA Water Treatment Center
|
||
11. Tazewell Community Hospital
|
||
12. Lincolnshire Park
|
||
13. N. Tazewell Elementary
|
||
14. Tazewell WWTP
|
||
15. Tazewell County Fairgrounds
|
||
16. Tazewell Little League Park
|
||
17. Tazewell County School Board Office
|
||
18. Tazewell Elementary School
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL. VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 41
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POLICE DEPARTMENT The Tazewell Police Department is the primary law enforcement agency
|
||
serving the Town. The department presently includes eleven (11) full-time
|
||
sworn officers, one school resource officer, one part-time secretary and
|
||
one administrative assistant who also serves as a dispatcher for day-shift
|
||
officers.
|
||
|
||
●Chief of Police
|
||
●Lieutenant
|
||
●Sergeant
|
||
●(7) Full-time Patrol Officers ●Patrol Officer/Code Enforcement ●School Resource Officer (Grant
|
||
●Position) Administrative Assistant
|
||
●Part-time Secretary This level of staffing provides one full-time sworn officer, including
|
||
supervisors, per 421 residents of the town based upon 2000 Census data.
|
||
At present, the department has six vehicles, including two four-wheel drive
|
||
vehicles.
|
||
|
||
Police headquarters are located in the Town’s Municipal Building . The space
|
||
for the police department includes four offices (chief, dispatcher, lieutenant/
|
||
sergeant’s office, and investigator’s office), one squad room, one exercise
|
||
room, a kitchen area/interview area, and an evidence room. In addition,
|
||
the police department has a four lane outdoor shooting range. Persons
|
||
arrested are processed and jailed at the Southwest Virginia Regional Jail.
|
||
|
||
Officers patrol a six-square mile area, which includes approximately 1,700
|
||
residences and 200 businesses. The department has an average response
|
||
time of 4-5 minutes. Calls are dispatched either through the town’s
|
||
dispatcher during the eight hour day shift or through the Tazewell County
|
||
Central Dispatch 24 hours a day. In 2012, the police department answered
|
||
approximately 10,000 telephone calls for assistance. During this time period,
|
||
there were 213 misdemeanor arrests, 113 felony arrests, and 487 citations
|
||
issued by the department.
|
||
|
||
Law enforcement outside of the town’s corporate limits is provided by the
|
||
Tazewell County Sheriff’s Department. Upon request, Town officers will
|
||
respond to calls for assistance from the Sheriff’s Department or the Virginia
|
||
State Police in areas surrounding the town. In addition to normal duties,
|
||
the department also directs school traffic and County Fair traffic, escorts
|
||
funerals, and provides escorts for businesses to banks for deposits. All
|
||
|
||
POLICE DEPARTMENT
|
||
|
||
The Tazewell Police Department is the primary law enforcement agency
|
||
serving the Town. The department presently includes eleven (11) full-time
|
||
‘sworn officers, one school resource officer, one part-time secretary and
|
||
‘one administrative assistant who also serves as a dispatcher for day-shift
|
||
officers.
|
||
|
||
Chief of Police
|
||
Lieutenant
|
||
|
||
Sergeant
|
||
|
||
#(7) Full-time Patrol Officers
|
||
Patrol Officer/Code Enforcement
|
||
#School Resource Officer (Grant
|
||
Position) Administrative Assistant
|
||
‘Part-time Secretary
|
||
|
||
This level of staffing provides one full-time sworn officer, including
|
||
supervisors, per 421 residents of the town based upon 2000 Census data.
|
||
Atpresent, the department has six vehicles, including two four-wheel drive
|
||
vehicles.
|
||
|
||
Police headquarters are located in the Town's Municipal Building. The space
|
||
for the police department includes four offices (chief, dispatcher, lieutenant!
|
||
sergeant's office, and investigator's office), one squad room, one exercise
|
||
room, a kitchen area/interview area, and an evidenceroom. In addition,
|
||
the police department has a four lane outdoor shooting range. Persons
|
||
arrested are processed and jailed at the Southwest Virginia Regional Jail.
|
||
|
||
Officers patrol a six-square mile area, which includes approximately 1,700
|
||
residences and 200 businesses. The department has an average response
|
||
time of 4-5 minutes. Calls are dispatched either through the town's
|
||
dispatcher during the eight hour day shift or through the Tazewell County
|
||
Central Dispatch 24 hours a day. In 2012, the police department answered
|
||
approximately 10,000 telephone calls for assistance. During this time period,
|
||
there were 213 misdemeanor arrests, 113 felony arrests, and 487 citations
|
||
issued by the department.
|
||
|
||
Law enforcement outside of the town's corporate limits is provided by the
|
||
Tazewell County Sheriff's Department. Upon request, Town officers will
|
||
respond to calls for assistance from the Sheriff's Department or the Virginia
|
||
State Police in areas surrounding the town. In addition to normal duties,
|
||
the departmentalso directs school traffic and County Fair traffic, escorts
|
||
funerals, and provides escorts for businesses to banks for deposits. All
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 41
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES Page 42
|
||
|
||
officers are required to take an eighteen-week law enforcement-training
|
||
program within one year of the date of hire.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS In terms of personnel, the police department envisions that it will need a
|
||
full-time investigator to handle all of the criminal cases, the school resource
|
||
officer grant position made into a town paid position, and a patrol position
|
||
to float from shift-to-shift to replace the current part-time position. Equipment
|
||
needs include surveillance cameras in all of the patrol cars and new computers
|
||
for each office. Policy issues that should be addressed include completing
|
||
the State Accreditation process that has been initiated in order for the
|
||
department to be recognized as an accredited agency.
|
||
|
||
PUBLIC WORKS
|
||
The Town’s Public Works Department
|
||
is responsible for the fol lowing
|
||
facilities and functions:
|
||
|
||
|
||
•
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Each of these areas includes a variety
|
||
of activities and duties depending
|
||
upon the change in seasons and the
|
||
level of use. Currently, the Town
|
||
employs a Public Works Director who
|
||
Superv ises twenty-four (24)
|
||
employees. Off ices for the P ubl ic Works
|
||
Department are located in the Town
|
||
|
||
|
||
Equipment Shed
|
||
|
||
|
||
Town shop
|
||
|
||
Shop building behind the Municipal Building. This building and an adjoining
|
||
storage shed are used for vehicle maintenance and equipment storage. The
|
||
garage also supports operations of the garbage collection and street
|
||
maintenance divisions.
|
||
|
||
STREET MAINTENANCE Tazewell’s street maintenance division is responsible for repair and
|
||
|
||
●Maintenance of streets,
|
||
highways, alleys, sidewalks and
|
||
mowing public rights-of-way.
|
||
|
||
●Installation and maintenance
|
||
of water and sanitary sewer
|
||
lines.
|
||
|
||
●Solid waste collection and
|
||
disposal.
|
||
|
||
officers are required to take an eighteen-week law enforcement-training
|
||
program within one year of the date of hire.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS
|
||
|
||
In terms of personnel, the police department envisions that it will need a
|
||
full-time investigator to handle all of the criminal cases, the school resource
|
||
officer grant position made into a town paid position, anda patrol position
|
||
to float from shift-to-shift to replace the current part-time position. Equipment
|
||
needs include surveillance cameras in all of the patrol cars and new computers
|
||
\clude completing
|
||
the State Accreditation process that has been initiated in order for the
|
||
department to be recognized as an accredited agency.
|
||
|
||
PUBLIC WORKS
|
||
|
||
The Town's Public Works Department
|
||
is responsible for the following
|
||
facilities and functions:
|
||
‘*Maintenance of _ streets,
|
||
ighways, alleys, sidewalks and
|
||
mowing public rights-of-way.
|
||
|
||
‘Installation and maintenance
|
||
of water and sanitary sewer
|
||
lines.
|
||
|
||
‘*Solid waste collection and
|
||
disposal.
|
||
|
||
Each of these areas includes a variety
|
||
of activities and duties depending
|
||
upon the change in seasons and the
|
||
level of use. Currently, the Town
|
||
‘employs a Public Works Director who
|
||
Supervises twenty-four (24)
|
||
|
||
‘employees.
|
||
Offices for the Public Works
|
||
Department are located in the Town Town shop
|
||
|
||
Shop building behind the Municipal Building. This building and an adjoining
|
||
storage shed are used for vehicle maintenance and equipment storage. The
|
||
garage also supports operations of the garbage collection and street
|
||
maintenance divisions.
|
||
|
||
STREET MAINTENANCE
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s street maintenance division is responsible for repair and
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 42
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES Page 42
|
||
|
||
maintenance of approximately 63 lane miles of streets and alleys, excluding
|
||
|
||
maintenance of approximately 63 lane miles of streets and alleys, excluding
|
||
|
||
Paae 42.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES Page 43
|
||
|
||
primary roads such as the U.S. 460 by-pass, which is maintained by the
|
||
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). The Town street crew
|
||
consists of a streets superintendent, a maintenance superintendent, five (5)
|
||
equipment operators and three (3) maintenance workers. In addition to
|
||
paving and patching of roads, the street maintenance division is responsible
|
||
for mowing rights-of way, snow removal, and street sign replacements and
|
||
additions. The division also performs yearly upgrades to sidewalks, bridges,
|
||
crosswalks, etc.
|
||
|
||
WATER SERVICE The water distribution system for the Town of Tazewell is owned and
|
||
operated by the Town, with the exception of the Greater Tazewell Area
|
||
Regional Water Plant, which is owned by the Tazewell County Public Service
|
||
Authority (TCPSA). The distribution system provides water for approximately
|
||
2,238 connections, of which, 2,178 connections are located within the
|
||
town limits. The remaining 60 connections are located in the County. The
|
||
water distribution service area is illustrated in the Existing Public Water Services
|
||
Map.
|
||
|
||
WATER SOURCES
|
||
A contract between the Town and the
|
||
TCPSA allows Tazewell to purchase a
|
||
maximum of 1.70 million gallons per
|
||
day (MGD) from the Authority’s Water
|
||
Treatment Plant. The water plant
|
||
receives raw water from three sources:
|
||
Lake Witten, the Clinch River and the
|
||
Cox Branch Impoundment. The plant
|
||
has a current capacity of 1.95 MGD,
|
||
with a capacity to be upgraded to 2.66
|
||
|
||
|
||
Water Treatment Plant
|
||
|
||
MGD. Built in 1964, the plant was upgraded from 1.0 MGD in 2000. The
|
||
plant operates twenty-two hours per day with a staff of three licensed
|
||
operators. Based on water plant production records provided by the TCPSA
|
||
for January through December 2002, the average daily production is 1.26
|
||
MGD, or 65 percent of its design capacity. Water System Accountability Based upon water billing register records provided by the Town the average
|
||
annual demand for water is 1.70 MGD, or 86 percent of the current contract
|
||
amount. A comparison of the billing register and plant production records
|
||
indicates that current accountability is approximately 43 percent. With an
|
||
accountability of 43 percent and an average quantity of 1.26 MGD entering
|
||
|
||
primary roads suchas the U.S. 460 by-pass, which is maintained by the
|
||
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). The Town street crew
|
||
consists of a streets superintendent, a maintenance superintendent, five (5)
|
||
equipment operators and three (3) maintenance workers. In addition to
|
||
paving and patching of roads, the street maintenance division is responsible
|
||
for mowing rights-of way, snow removal, and street sign replacements and
|
||
additions. The division also performs yearly upgrades to sidewalks, bri
|
||
crosswalks, etc.
|
||
|
||
WATER SERVICE
|
||
|
||
The water distribution system for the Town of Tazewell is owned and
|
||
operated by the Town, with the exception of the Greater Tazewell Area
|
||
Regional Water Plant, which is owned by the Tazewell County Public Service
|
||
Authority (TCPSA). The distribution system provides water for approximately
|
||
2,238 connections, of which, 2,178 connections are located within the
|
||
town limits. The remaining 60 connections are located in the County. The
|
||
water distribution service area isillustrated in the Existing Public Water Services
|
||
Map.
|
||
|
||
WATER SOURCES
|
||
|
||
‘contract between the Town and the
|
||
TCPSA allows Tazewell to purchase a
|
||
maximum of 1.70 million gallons per
|
||
day (MGD) from the Authority's Water
|
||
Treatment Plant. The water plant
|
||
receives raw water from three sources:
|
||
Lake Witten, the Clinch River and the
|
||
Cox Branch Impoundment. The plant
|
||
has a currentcapacity of 1.95 MGD,
|
||
|
||
with a capacity to be upgraded to 2.66
|
||
|
||
Water Treatment Plant
|
||
|
||
MGD. Built in 1964, the plant was upgraded from 1.0 MGD in 2000. The
|
||
plant operates twenty-two hours per day with a staff of three licensed
|
||
operators. Based on water plant production records provided by the TCPSA
|
||
for January through December 2002, the average daily production is 1.26
|
||
MGD, or 65 percent of its design capacity.
|
||
|
||
Water System Accountability
|
||
|
||
Based upon water billing register records provided by the Town the average
|
||
annual demand for water is 1.70 MGD, o 86 percent of the current contract
|
||
amount. A comparison of the billing register and plant production records
|
||
indicates that current accountability is approximately 43 percent. With an
|
||
accountability of 43 percent and an average quantity of 1.26 MGD entering
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 43
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES Page 44
|
||
|
||
the distribution system, approximately 0.72 MGD is unaccounted for due to
|
||
leaks in the system, faulty meters, and/or unmetered usage.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell recognizes the need to improve the accountability of the system
|
||
by replacing old water lines and meters and by ending currently unmetered
|
||
usage. The Water Line Reconstruction project for the Town, which has
|
||
been designed and is now under construction, will assist in meeting the
|
||
need to improve accountability. Typically, water accountability for existing
|
||
systems should be in the range of 70 to 90 percent. When the project is
|
||
completed, the accountability should increase to meet this range.
|
||
|
||
WATER STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION The existing water distribution system consists of approximately 41 miles of
|
||
water lines, five water booster pump stations and six water storage tanks.
|
||
The water line diameters range in size from 1/4 to 12 inches. The distribution
|
||
system serves 2,018 connections, of which, approximately 1,668 connections
|
||
are residential and 350 are commercial. The Town is divided into three
|
||
service areas with the following tank storage capacities and water distribution
|
||
lines:
|
||
TABLE 3.1 WATER SERVICE AREAS
|
||
|
||
Service Area Tank(s) Capacity Water Distribution
|
||
System
|
||
|
||
|
||
Fourway Dogwood
|
||
Peak and Buskell North Tazewell
|
||
|
||
|
||
(1) 400,000 gallon tank (1) 750,000 gallon tank
|
||
|
||
150,000 gallon tank 50,000 gallon tank (1) 60.000 gallon tank
|
||
|
||
|
||
10 miles of lines 15 miles of lines
|
||
16 miles of lines
|
||
|
||
TOTAL
|
||
1.41 million gallons 41 miles of lines
|
||
|
||
|
||
WASTEWATER TREATMENT The sanitary sewer system is owned and operated by the Town of Tazewell.
|
||
Existing service areas are illustrated on the Existing Public Sewer Facilities
|
||
Map. With few exceptions, the town and some sections of the County
|
||
adjoining the town are serviced by public sanitary sewer service. Total
|
||
sewer connections number 1,874, of which 1,803 are located within the
|
||
town limits. The remaining 71 connections are located in the County. Of
|
||
the 2,018 connections, 1,668 are residential and 350 commercial.
|
||
|
||
the distribution system, approximately 0.72MGD is unaccounted for due to
|
||
leaks in the system, faulty meters, and/or unmetered usage.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell recognizes the need to improve the accountability of the system
|
||
by replacing old water lines and meters and by ending currently unmetered
|
||
usage. The Water Line Reconstruction project for the Town, which has
|
||
been designed and is now under construction, will assist in meeting the
|
||
need to improve accountability. Typically, water accountability for existing
|
||
systems should be in the range of 70 to 90 percent. When the project is
|
||
‘completed, the accountability should increase to meet this range.
|
||
|
||
WATER STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION
|
||
|
||
The existing water distribution system consists of approximately 41 miles of
|
||
water lines, five water booster pump stations and six water storage tanks.
|
||
‘The water line diameters range in size from 1/4 to 12 inches. The distribution
|
||
system serves 2,018 connections, of which, approximately 1,668 connections
|
||
are residential and 350 are commercial. The Town is divided into three
|
||
service areas with the following tank storage capacities and water distribution
|
||
lines:
|
||
|
||
TABLE 3.1 WATER SERVICEAREAS
|
||
|
||
Service Area Tank(s) Capacity Water Distribution
|
||
System
|
||
Fourway (1) 400,000 gallon tank | 10 miles of lines
|
||
Dogwood (1)750,000 gallon tank | 15 miles of lines
|
||
Peak and Buskell 150,000 gallon tank
|
||
50,000 gallon tank
|
||
|
||
North Tazewell (160.000 gallon tank | 16 miles of lines
|
||
TOTAL 1.41 million gallons 41 miles of lines
|
||
|
||
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
|
||
|
||
The sanitary sewer system is owned and operated by the Town of Tazewell.
|
||
Existing service areas are illustrated on the Existing Public Sewer Facilities
|
||
Map. With few exceptions, the town and some sections of the County
|
||
adjoining the town are serviced by public sanitary sewer service. Total
|
||
sewer connections number 1,874, of which 1,803 are located within the
|
||
town limits. The remaining 71 connections are located in the County. Of
|
||
the 2,018 connections, 1,668 are residential and 350 commercial.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 44
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PINE STREET
|
||
|
||
PUMP STATION I
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
|
||
Drawn
|
||
|
||
I I SERVICE AREA
|
||
|
||
WATER MAIN
|
||
|
||
WATER TREATMENT PLANT • PUMP STATION
|
||
|
||
Datil FEB..
|
||
Fh No. 724CD1-2 l724o-oo
|
||
|
||
SCALE: = 2000'
|
||
|
||
TOWN LIMITS
|
||
|
||
EX
|
||
IST
|
||
|
||
ING
|
||
PU
|
||
|
||
BL
|
||
IC
|
||
|
||
SE
|
||
WE
|
||
|
||
R F
|
||
AC
|
||
|
||
ILI
|
||
TIE
|
||
|
||
S F
|
||
OR
|
||
|
||
|
||
TH
|
||
|
||
E T
|
||
OW
|
||
|
||
N O
|
||
F T
|
||
|
||
AZ
|
||
EW
|
||
|
||
EL
|
||
L
|
||
|
||
SCALE: 1”= 2000’
|
||
|
||
FOURWAY
|
||
|
||
SERVICE AREA. Le TANK
|
||
|
||
NORTH TAZEWELL 4 Usp
|
||
TANK/PUMP |
|
||
|
||
y
|
||
|
||
GREATER TAZEWELL AREA
|
||
REGIONAL WATER PLANT
|
||
|
||
DOGWOOD ROAD
|
||
TANKS/PUMP STATION
|
||
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
|
||
SERVICE AREA A WATER TREATMENT PLANT
|
||
|
||
WATER MAIN @ Pune station
|
||
|
||
SCALE: 1”= 2000" 2000"
|
||
|
||
— — — — _TOWNLMITS
|
||
|
||
EXISTING PUBLIC SEWER FACILITIES FOR
|
||
THE TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
• WATER STORAGE TANK
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
SOURCE: TAZEWELL COUNTY
|
||
|
||
911 MAPPING
|
||
|
||
EXHIBIT A
|
||
|
||
@ WATER STORAGE TANK SOURCE: TAZEWELL COUNTY EXHIBIT
|
||
911 MAPPING A
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
• _
|
||
|
||
SERVICE AREA ·1
|
||
|
||
|
||
(\.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
'lb: • '}tiCD +lfttal
|
||
|
||
Brgilretn Ari:hit.ds Pliln7nOF
|
||
|
||
I
|
||
j
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
TREATMENT PLANT
|
||
|
||
SEWER MAIN PUMP STATION
|
||
|
||
Dalol F'EII.. ZQO;I
|
||
Flo .... 7240EX1-2 ----------------
|
||
|
||
SCALE: 1• = 2000'
|
||
- - - - TOWN LIMITS SOURCE: TAZEWELL COUNTY 911
|
||
|
||
MA
|
||
|
||
EX
|
||
IST
|
||
|
||
ING
|
||
PU
|
||
|
||
BL
|
||
IC
|
||
|
||
SE
|
||
WE
|
||
|
||
R F
|
||
AC
|
||
|
||
ILI
|
||
TIE
|
||
|
||
S F
|
||
OR
|
||
|
||
|
||
TH
|
||
|
||
E T
|
||
OW
|
||
|
||
N O
|
||
F T
|
||
|
||
AZ
|
||
EW
|
||
|
||
EL
|
||
L
|
||
|
||
SERVICE AREA
|
||
|
||
TAZEWELL WATER POLLUTION
|
||
CONTROL FACILITY
|
||
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
|
||
A TREATMENT PLANT
|
||
SEWER MAIN e@ PUMP STATION
|
||
|
||
SCALE: 1+ = 2000°
|
||
|
||
TOWN LIMITS SOURCE: — TAZEWELL COUNTY
|
||
|
||
EXISTING PUBLIC SEWER FACILITIES FOR
|
||
|
||
THE TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PPING
|
||
|
||
|
||
PPING
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 45
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
The plant is a 2.0 MGD facility that
|
||
serves the town and i ts urban
|
||
environs. The plant site is located
|
||
off of Pisgah Rd. along the Clinch
|
||
River, which is the discharge point for
|
||
the treated effluent. The facility is
|
||
an activated sludge treatment plant
|
||
with tertiary treatment. The plant
|
||
began operation in 1964 and was
|
||
expanded to its current design capacity
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
in 1991. Average flow to the plant is 900,000 gallons per day or 38% of its design
|
||
capacity.
|
||
|
||
Six full-time employees, including the supervisor, staff the plant. Personnel include
|
||
one Class IV operator, one Class III operator, one Class I operator, and two general
|
||
maintenance workers. The plant operates a minimum of ten hours a day on
|
||
weekdays and eight hours a day on weekends, 365 days a year WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM The Existing Public Sewer Facilities Map, generally indicates the areas in which public
|
||
sewer service is provided. In all, the Town maintains over 20 miles of lines. Sewerage
|
||
is fed to the treatment plant through a gravity system, with four small lift stations in North
|
||
Tazewell and the Four-Way Section of the town.
|
||
|
||
Sewer mains in the service area are primarily 6 and 8-inch diameter lines with a
|
||
24-inch diameter main line.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS The majority of the system was installed in the early 1960’s. Due to the age and
|
||
associated leakage, the sewer lines are experiencing widespread inflow and infiltration
|
||
problems. The Town will need to work with Tazewell County to broaden its customer
|
||
base in order to bring in the additional resources needed to upgrade the system.
|
||
|
||
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL The Town provides curbside solid waste collection to both residential and business
|
||
customers as well as cardboard recycling for business customers. Seasonal
|
||
collection of leaves and brush is also provided to residents at no charge. The Town
|
||
has three garbage trucks with one operating three days a week, one operating two
|
||
days a week and the third truck serves as a back- up and is also used for cardboard
|
||
recycling . There are six employees who operate the garbage trucks. All of the
|
||
Town and County refuse is disposed of at the Tazewell County Sanitary Landfill
|
||
located east of the town between it and Bluefield.
|
||
|
||
Wastewater Treatment Plant
|
||
|
||
The plant is a 2.0 MGD facility that
|
||
serves the town and its urban
|
||
environs. The plant site is located
|
||
off of Pisgah Rd. along the Clinch
|
||
River, which is the discharge point for
|
||
the treated effluent. The facility is
|
||
an activated sludge treatment plant
|
||
with tertiary treatment. The plant
|
||
began operation in 1964 and was
|
||
‘expanded to its current design capacity
|
||
|
||
Wastewater Treatment Plant
|
||
|
||
in 1991. Average flow to the plant is 900,000 gallons per day or 38% of its design
|
||
capacity.
|
||
|
||
Six full-time employees, including the supervisor, staff the plant. Personnel include
|
||
‘one Class IV operator, one Class III operator, one Class | operator, and two general
|
||
maintenance workers. The plant operates a minimum of ten hours a day on
|
||
weekdays and eight hours a day on weekends, 365 days a year
|
||
|
||
WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM
|
||
|
||
The Existing Public Sewer Facilities Map, generally indicates the areas in which public
|
||
sewer service is provided. In all, the Town maintains over 20 miles of lines. Sewerage
|
||
isfed to the treatment plant through agravity system, with four small lift stations in North
|
||
Tazewell and the Four-Way Section of the town,
|
||
|
||
‘Sewer mains in the service area are primarily 6 and 8-inch diameterlines with a
|
||
24-inch diameter main line.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS
|
||
|
||
The majority of the system was installed in the early 1960's. Due to the age and
|
||
‘associated leakage, the sewer lines are experiencing widespread inflow and infiltration
|
||
problems. The Town will need to work with Tazewell County to broaden its customer
|
||
base in order to bring in the additional resources needed to upgrade the system.
|
||
|
||
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
|
||
|
||
The Town provides curbside solid waste collection to both residential and business
|
||
‘customers as well as cardboard recycling for business customers. Seasonal
|
||
collection of leaves and brush is also provided to residents at no charge. The Town
|
||
has three garbage trucks with one operating three days week, one operating two
|
||
days aweek and the third truck serves as a back- up andis also used for cardboard
|
||
recycling. There are six employees who operate the garbage trucks. All of the
|
||
‘Town and County refuse is disposed of at the Tazewell County Sanitary Landfill
|
||
located east of the town between it and Bluefield.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 45
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
Page 46
|
||
|
||
PARKS AND RECREATION
|
||
The Town of Tazewell’s main park and
|
||
recreational facility is Lincolnshire
|
||
Park, located off of VA Highway 61
|
||
(Riverside Drive) in the Four-Way
|
||
Section of town. The facility includes
|
||
a 25-acre lake for boating and fishing ,
|
||
two softball fields, tennis courts, two
|
||
basketball courts, a volleyball court,
|
||
and a Junior Olympic size pool. The
|
||
parks and recreation department
|
||
office is also located here.
|
||
Throughout the year, the Parks and
|
||
Recreat ion department of fers
|
||
programs for all ages. Programs
|
||
include:
|
||
Spring—Men’s Softball
|
||
Summer—Swimming lessons, coed
|
||
softball, and coed volleyball Fall—
|
||
Soccer
|
||
W inter—Basketbal l , women’s
|
||
volleyball
|
||
Future Needs
|
||
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES PUBLIC SCHOOLS Five public schools serve the Town.
|
||
Tazewell High, Tazewell Elementary,
|
||
and Tazewell County Career and
|
||
Technical Center are grouped together
|
||
on adjoining properties off of Bulldog
|
||
Lane. North Tazewell Elementary is
|
||
located off of Riverside Drive. These
|
||
four schools are within the Town’s
|
||
corporate limits. The fifth school,
|
||
Tazewel l Middle, is located just
|
||
outside of the town off of Route 61.
|
||
Table 3.2 provides current and
|
||
projected enrollment for the area
|
||
public schools.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Lincolnshire Park Entrance Main Park Building
|
||
|
||
Tazewell High School
|
||
|
||
PARKS AND RECREATION
|
||
|
||
The Town of Tazewell's main park and
|
||
recreational facility is Lincolnshire
|
||
Park, located off of VA Highway 61
|
||
(Riverside Drive) in the Four-Way
|
||
Section of town. The facility includes
|
||
‘a 25-acre lake for boating and fis!
|
||
two softball fields, tennis courts, two
|
||
basketball courts, a volleyball court,
|
||
anda Junior Olympic size pool. The
|
||
parks and recreation department
|
||
office is also located here.
|
||
|
||
Lincolnshire Park Entrance
|
||
|
||
Throughoutthe year, the Parks and
|
||
Recreation department offers
|
||
programsfor all ages. Programs
|
||
include:
|
||
|
||
‘Spring—Men's Softball
|
||
Summer—Swimming lessons, coed
|
||
softball, and coed volleyball Fall—
|
||
Soccer
|
||
|
||
Winter—Basketball, women's
|
||
volleyball
|
||
|
||
Future Needs
|
||
|
||
Main Park Building
|
||
|
||
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
|
||
|
||
Five public schools serve the Town.
|
||
Tazewell High, Tazewell Elementary,
|
||
|
||
and Tazewell County Career and
|
||
|
||
Technical Center are grouped together
|
||
|
||
‘on adjoining properties off of Bulldog
|
||
|
||
Lane. North Tazewell Elementary is
|
||
|
||
located off of Riverside Drive. These
|
||
|
||
four schools are within the Town's
|
||
|
||
corporate limits. The fifth school,
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Middle, is located just
|
||
|
||
outside of the town off of Route 61. Tazewell High School
|
||
Table 3.2 provides current and
|
||
|
||
projected enrollment for the area
|
||
|
||
public schools.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 46
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TABLE 3.2 PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT
|
||
2002 Total Enrollment 2007 Total Enrollment 2014 Total Enrollment
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Elementary ( K-5) 610 531 600
|
||
|
||
North Tazewell Elementary (K-5) 397 344 291
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Middle School (6-8) 496 484 470
|
||
|
||
Tazewell High School (9-12) 603 626 590
|
||
|
||
Tazewell County Career & Technical Center N/A N/A 328
|
||
Source: Tazewell County School Board
|
||
Although operation and maintenance of public schools are the primary
|
||
responsibility of the Tazewell County School Board, the Town plays an
|
||
important role in support of education for the County. For example, the
|
||
School Board Office and four schools are located on sites within the town
|
||
limits, the town police department provides traffic control for the school
|
||
complex on Bulldog Lane, and school sports teams use the fields at
|
||
Lincolnshire Park. In addition, the town is a source of school age children
|
||
for the area.
|
||
|
||
HIGHER EDUCATION Bluefield College, located 15 miles east of Tazewell in Bluefield, Virginia, is
|
||
a private, Christian, 4-year liberal arts college that is an accredited member
|
||
of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). It offers 18
|
||
majors, which range from education, to business administration, to health
|
||
professions, to Christian ministry.
|
||
|
||
Bluefield State College, located in Bluefield, West Virginia, offers both two
|
||
and four-year degrees. Instructional programs are offered in engineering
|
||
technologies, business, teacher education, arts and sciences, nursing and
|
||
health science professions, and a variety of career fields.
|
||
|
||
Southwest Virginia Community College, located approximately 25 miles west
|
||
of Tazewell, is a two-year institute of higher education established as part
|
||
of Virginia’s statewide community college system. There are over sixty (60)
|
||
different programs of study available leading to an associate degree, diploma,
|
||
certificate, or career studies certificate. In addition to educational programs,
|
||
the college serves the region with economic development programs such
|
||
|
||
Page 47
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
TABLE 3.2 PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT
|
||
|
||
2002 Total Enrollment 2007 Total Enrollment 2014 Total Enrollment
|
||
Tazewell Elementary ( K-5) 610 531 600
|
||
North Tazewell Elementary 397 344 _
|
||
Teel ee ‘6 ‘ea 70
|
||
‘Tazewell High School (9-12) 603 626 590
|
||
Toreyal Coun cree & wa wa ne
|
||
|
||
Source: Tazewell County School Board
|
||
|
||
Although operation and maintenance of public schools are the primary
|
||
responsibility of the Tazewell County School Board, the Town plays an
|
||
important role in support of education for the County. For example, the
|
||
School Board Office and four schools are located on sites within the town
|
||
limits, the town police department provides traffic control for the school
|
||
complex on Bulldog Lane, and school sports teams use the fields at
|
||
Lincolnshire Park. In addition, the town is a source of school age children
|
||
for the area.
|
||
|
||
HIGHER EDUCATION
|
||
|
||
Bluefield College, located 15 miles east of Tazewell in Bluefield, Virgi
|
||
aprivate, Christian, 4-year liberal arts college that is an accredited member
|
||
of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). It offers 18
|
||
majors, which range from education, to business administration, to health
|
||
professions, to Christian ministry.
|
||
|
||
Bluefield State College, located in Bluefield, West Virginia, offers both two
|
||
and four-year degrees. Instructional programs are offered in engineering
|
||
technologies, business, teacher education, arts and sciences, nursing and
|
||
health science professions, and a variety of career fields.
|
||
|
||
Southwest Virginia Community College, located approximately 25 miles west
|
||
of Tazewell, is a two-year institute of higher education established as part
|
||
of Virginia's statewide community college system. There are over sixty (60)
|
||
different programs of study available leading to an associate degree, diploma,
|
||
certificate, or career studies certificate. In addition to educational programs,
|
||
the college serves the region with economicdevelopment programs such
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 47
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
as Workforce Development, Small Business Development and Procurement
|
||
Technical Assistance. The Cumberland Plateau Electronic Business Village is
|
||
hosted by the college and supported by its Business Division.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 48
|
||
|
||
as Workforce Development, Small Business Development and Procurement
|
||
Technical Assistance. The Cumberland Plateau Electronic Business Village is
|
||
hosted by the college and supported by its Business Division.
|
||
|
||
Page 48
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
LIBRARIES The Tazewell County Public Library is Tazewell’s primary library facility,
|
||
located on East Main Street in downtown Tazewell. The library system
|
||
contains 96,000 volumes including textbooks and research materials as well
|
||
as on-line research, reading and reference materials through the eBooks
|
||
database. It provides various programs for children including story time and
|
||
lunch time book discussions open to all ages. Other branches in Tazewell
|
||
County include locations in Bluefield and Richlands.
|
||
|
||
MEDICAL AND HEALTH CARE FACILITIES Tazewell Community Hospital is a 56-bed acute care facility located on Ben
|
||
Bolt Avenue. It is a not-for-profit corporation governed by a board of directors
|
||
and managed by the Carillion Health System of Roanoke, Virginia. The
|
||
hospital offers a wide range of inpatient and outpatient services including
|
||
general medical/surgical care, a home health program, and an on-site kidney
|
||
dialysis center. The hospital has a full-range of radiological diagnostics, a 24-
|
||
hour laboratory, cardiopulmonary rehabilitation and physical therapy services.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Heritage Hall is a 180-bed long-term care facility located on Ben Bolt Avenue
|
||
near Tazewell Community Hospital. The facility offers a number of services
|
||
for long-term care including nursing , physical therapy, occupational therapy,
|
||
and social work, dental, dietary, pharmacy, physician and mental health
|
||
services on-site for residents.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Community Hospital
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 49
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Community Hospital
|
||
|
||
LIBRARIES
|
||
|
||
The Tazewell County Public Library is Tazewell’s primary library facility,
|
||
located on East Main Street in downtown Tazewell. The library system
|
||
contains 96,000 volumes including textbooks and research materials as well
|
||
as on-line research, reading and reference materials through the eBooks
|
||
database. It provides various programs for children including story time and
|
||
lunch time book discussions open to all ages. Other branches in Tazewell
|
||
County include locations in Bluefield and Richlands.
|
||
|
||
MEDICAL AND HEALTH CARE FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Community Hospital is a 56-bed acute care facility located on Ben
|
||
Bolt Avenue. Its a not-for-profit corporation governed by a board of directors
|
||
and managed by the Carillion Health System of Roanoke, Virginia. The
|
||
hospital offers a wide range of inpatient and outpatient services including
|
||
general medical/surgical care, a home health program, and an on-site kidney
|
||
dialysis center. The hospital hasa full-range of radiological diagnostics, a 24-
|
||
hour laboratory, cardiopulmonary rehabilitation and physical therapy services.
|
||
|
||
Heritage Hallis a 180-bed long-term care facility located on Ben Bolt Avenue
|
||
near Tazewell Community Hospital. The facility offers a number of services
|
||
for long-term care including nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy,
|
||
and social work, dental, dietary, pharmacy, physician and mental health
|
||
services on-site for residents.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Page 49
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS & OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
GOALS & OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 50
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS + OBJECTIVES
|
||
If the Comprehensive Plan is to be useful, its stated goals must be known,
|
||
understood and supported by the people of Tazewell. The design of the
|
||
Plan and its various tools for implementation should be based upon these
|
||
goals. Should Tazewell’s goals and objectives substantially change, the Plan
|
||
and its implementation strategies should also change in response.
|
||
|
||
The following narrative outlines goals, objectives and strategies for each
|
||
functional area of the Plan.
|
||
|
||
●Goals are general policy statements of what the Town of Tazewell
|
||
as a community would like to achieve over the next twenty years.
|
||
|
||
●Objectives are more specific benchmarks of progress that serve to
|
||
support a respective goal.
|
||
|
||
●Finally, each objective is followed by a set of Strategies which
|
||
should be considered if Tazewell is to take positive steps toward its
|
||
desired future.
|
||
|
||
I. Economic Development Goal: To Continually Improve the
|
||
Economic
|
||
|
||
Well-Being of Tazewell and the Region.
|
||
Objective 1 - Maintain and Expand the Commercial/Business Base
|
||
a) Continue to promote the Tazewell area as a destination for
|
||
|
||
commercial, retail, and manufacturing activity. b) Promote innovative partnerships between area centers of
|
||
learning and training and the business community.
|
||
|
||
c) Work with local merchant and business groups to identify
|
||
strengths and reduce obstacles to their success and growth
|
||
potential.
|
||
|
||
d) Continue to diversify the local economic base by attracting
|
||
new retail stores and manufacturing firms, while encouraging
|
||
and facilitating the expansion of existing firms in the
|
||
community.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage adaptive reuse of vacant warehouses in North
|
||
Tazewell and the Historic Train Depot. f) Encourage adaptive reuse of the Old County Administration/
|
||
Social Services Building .
|
||
|
||
g) Encourage new industries to locate in the Tazewell Industrial
|
||
Park.
|
||
|
||
GOALS + OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
If the Comprehensive Plan is to be useful, its stated goals must be known,
|
||
understood and supported by the people of Tazewell. The design of the
|
||
Plan and its various tools for implementation should be based upon these
|
||
goals. Should Tazewell’s goals and objectives substantially change, the Plan
|
||
and its implementation strategies should also change in response.
|
||
|
||
The following narrative ou
|
||
functional area of the Plan.
|
||
|
||
1es goals, objectives and strategies for each
|
||
|
||
‘Goals are general policy statements of what the Town of Tazewell
|
||
as a community would like to achieve over the next twenty years.
|
||
|
||
‘*Objectives are more specific benchmarks of progress that serve to
|
||
support a respective goal.
|
||
|
||
‘Finally, each objective is followed by a set of Strategies which
|
||
should be considered if Tazewell is to take positive steps toward its
|
||
desired future.
|
||
|
||
|. Economic Development Goal: To Continually Improve the
|
||
Economic
|
||
|
||
Well-Being of Tazewell and the Region.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Maintain and Expand the Commercial/Business Base
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to promote the Tazewell area asa destination for
|
||
‘commercial, retail, and manufacturing activity.
|
||
|
||
b) Promote innovative partnerships between area centers of
|
||
learning and training and the business community.
|
||
|
||
°) Work with local merchant and business groups to identify
|
||
strengths and reduce obstacles to their success and growth
|
||
potential.
|
||
|
||
4) Continue to diversify the local economic base by attracting
|
||
|
||
new retail stores and manufacturing firms, while encouraging
|
||
and facilitating the expansion of existing firms in the
|
||
community.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage adaptive reuse of vacant warehouses in North
|
||
Tazewell and the Historic Train Depot.
|
||
|
||
) Encourage adaptive reuse of the Old County Administration’
|
||
Social Services Building
|
||
|
||
9) Encourage new industries to locate in the Tazewell Industrial
|
||
|
||
Park.
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 50
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 51
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Promote Tourism, Cultural and Historical
|
||
Development a) Expand year-round tourism, group tour visitation and
|
||
|
||
strategic marketing campaigns by the Tazewell Area
|
||
Chamber of Commerce and the Tazewel l County
|
||
Department of Tourism.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to improve Tazewell’s downtown area1 and
|
||
gateways in order to enhance their character and
|
||
attractiveness to visitors.
|
||
|
||
c) Establish a Town of Tazewell Visitor ’s Center at the
|
||
Fairgrounds Road interchanges with U. S. 19/460. d) Encourage development of conference/lodging facilities in
|
||
the Tazewell area at one of the U.S. 19/460 interchanges.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage development of bed and breakfast
|
||
establishments in Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
f) Continue to preserve and enhance the cultural resources
|
||
of Tazewell, and encourage opportunities for cultural
|
||
expression and experience.
|
||
|
||
g) Continue restoration and preservation efforts in the historic
|
||
district and along Railroad Avenue in North Tazewell
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Maintain and Expand Professional and Governmental
|
||
Services a) Continue to promote Tazewell’s role as a center for local,
|
||
|
||
county and regional government offices.
|
||
b) Encourage the retention, expansion and new development
|
||
|
||
of professional and governmental offices in the Tazewell
|
||
area.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell County Courthouse
|
||
|
||
c) Continue to encourage professional and governmental office
|
||
development that is in harmony with the architecture and
|
||
character of the Town of Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Promote and Maintain a Diversified Industrial Base
|
||
Compatible with the Town of Tazewell and the County. a) Work with existing industries to identify their needs and
|
||
|
||
assist in meeting those needs.
|
||
b) Work with the Tazewell Area Chamber of Commerce, the
|
||
|
||
Industrial Development Authority of Tazewell County, the
|
||
Virginia Coalfield Economic Development Authority and the
|
||
Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission to foster
|
||
local manufacturing growth.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Promote Tourism, Cultural and Historical
|
||
Development
|
||
|
||
a) Expand year-round tourism, group tour visitation and
|
||
strategic marketing campaigns by the Tazewell Area
|
||
|
||
Chamber of Commerce and the Tazewell County
|
||
Department of Tourism.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to improve Tazewell’s downtown area’ and
|
||
gateways in order to enhance their character and
|
||
attractiveness to visitors.
|
||
|
||
c) Establish a Town of Tazewell Visitor's Center at the
|
||
Fairgrounds Road interchanges with U. S. 19/460.
|
||
|
||
4) Encourage development of conference/lodging facilitie
|
||
the Tazewell area at one of the U.S. 19/460 interchanges.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage development of bed and breakfast
|
||
establishments in Tazewell
|
||
|
||
) Continue to preserve and enhance the cultural resources
|
||
of Tazewell, and encourage opportunities for cultural
|
||
expression and experience.
|
||
|
||
9) Continue restoration and preservation efforts in the historic
|
||
district and along Railroad Avenue in North Tazewell,
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Maintain and Expand Professional and Governmental
|
||
|
||
Services
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to promote Tazewell’s role as a center for local,
|
||
county and regional government offices.
|
||
|
||
b) Encourage theretention, expansion and new development
|
||
of professional and governmental offices in the Tazewell
|
||
area
|
||
|
||
c) Continue to encourage professional and governmental office
|
||
development that is in harmony with the architecture and
|
||
character of the Town of Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell County Courthouse
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Promote and Maintain a Diversified Industrial Base
|
||
Compatible with the Town of Tazewell and the County.
|
||
|
||
a) Work with existing industries to identify their needs and
|
||
assist in meeting those needs.
|
||
|
||
b) Work with the Tazewell Area Chamber of Commerce, the
|
||
Industrial Development Authority of Tazewell County, the
|
||
Virginia Coalfield Economic Development Authority and the
|
||
‘Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission to foster
|
||
local manufacturing growth
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 51
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 52
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
c) Encourage and participate in Tazewell County ’s ongoing
|
||
efforts to attract, retain and expand industrial development
|
||
at the areas’ industrial parks.
|
||
|
||
d) Strengthen the capacity and role of the Tazewell Industrial
|
||
Development Authority (IDA). e) Continue a dialogue between the Town, the County IDA
|
||
and the Cumberland Plateau PDC to discuss areas of mutual
|
||
interest and possible interaction, including securing loans
|
||
and lines of credit.
|
||
|
||
Objective 5 - Promote Sustainable Forms of Economic Development a) Encourage development of a highly skilled and trained local
|
||
workforce, which will offer its employers a competitive
|
||
edge in technology dependent businesses.
|
||
|
||
b) Target sectors of Tazewell’s tourism industry for enhanced
|
||
development. Promote sectors which reflect the area’s
|
||
exceptional historic and scenic setting such as heritage
|
||
tourism, ecotourism, agritourism and guided travel.
|
||
|
||
c) Promote locally owned/operated, small-scale business
|
||
development including traditional cottage industry, home-
|
||
based businesses and internet retailing and services.
|
||
|
||
d) Encourage and cultivate diverse forms of small business or
|
||
industry. Target sectors suitable for the area such as arts &
|
||
crafts, organic produce/meats and specialty wood products.
|
||
|
||
e) Link local efforts to establish a sustainable community with
|
||
regional efforts in the Cumberland Plateau Planning District.
|
||
|
||
f) Encourage the recycling of area manufacturing by-products
|
||
to increase productivity and stimulate new business
|
||
opportunities.
|
||
|
||
II. Historical and Cultural Development Goal: To Promote
|
||
the Historical and Cultural Heritage of Tazewell and Surrounding
|
||
Areas.
|
||
|
||
Objective 1 - Promote and Preserve Historical Areas Through the
|
||
Use of Architectural Review and Historic Zoning . a) Monitor, review and regulate the appropriateness of
|
||
|
||
architectural features and uses in the Historic Preservation
|
||
(HP) District.
|
||
|
||
©) Encourage and participate in Tazewell County's ongoing
|
||
|
||
efforts to attract, retain and expand industrial development
|
||
atthe areas’ industrial parks.
|
||
|
||
4) Strengthen the capacity and role of the Tazewell Industrial
|
||
Development Authority (IDA).
|
||
|
||
) Continue a dialogue between the Town, the County IDA
|
||
|
||
and the Cumberland Plateau PDC to discuss areas of mutual
|
||
interest and possible interaction, including securing loans
|
||
and ines of credit.
|
||
|
||
Objective 5 - Promote Sustainable Forms of Economic Development
|
||
|
||
a) Encourage development of a highly skilled and trained local
|
||
workforce, which will offer its employers a competitive
|
||
edge in technology dependent businesses.
|
||
|
||
b) Target sectors of Tazewell’s tourism industry for enhanced
|
||
development. Promote sectors which reflect the area's
|
||
exceptional historic and scenic setting such as heritage
|
||
tourism, ecotourism, agritourism and guided travel.
|
||
|
||
°) Promote locally owned/operated, small-scale business
|
||
development including traditional cottage industry, home-
|
||
based businesses and internet retailing and services.
|
||
|
||
4d) Encourage and cultivate diverse forms of small business or
|
||
industry. Target sectors suitable for the area such as arts &
|
||
crafts, organic produce/meats and specialty wood products.
|
||
|
||
e) Link local efforts to establish a sustainable community with
|
||
regional efforts in the Cumberland Plateau Planning District.
|
||
|
||
f) Encourage the recycling of area manufacturing by-products
|
||
to increase productivity and stimulate new business
|
||
opportunities.
|
||
|
||
Il. Historical and Cultural Development Goal: To Promote
|
||
the Historical and Cultural Heritage of Tazewell and Surrounding
|
||
|
||
Areas.
|
||
|
||
Objective 1 - Promote and Preserve Historical Areas Through the
|
||
Use of Architectural Review and Historic Zoning.
|
||
|
||
a) Monitor, review and regulate the appropriateness of
|
||
architectural features and uses in the Historic Preservation
|
||
(HP) District.
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 52
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 53
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
b) Establish a Historic and Architectural Review Board c) Develop, implement and periodically update, as necessary,
|
||
Comprehensive Design Review Guidelines to be adopted
|
||
by the Tazewell Board of Historic and Architectural Review.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Continue to Identify and Recognize Historic Properties
|
||
Outside of the Tazewell Historic Preservation (HP) District. a) Continue to maintain and enlarge as necessary the
|
||
|
||
designation of the Tazewell Historic Preservation (HP)
|
||
District.
|
||
|
||
b) Obtain a majority consensus of support among the affected
|
||
property owners prior to any future enlargement of the
|
||
Historic Preservation (HP) District.
|
||
|
||
c) Sponsor preparation of a National/State Register nomination
|
||
in conjunction with any future enlargement of the
|
||
downtown historic district or designation of additional
|
||
districts.
|
||
|
||
d) Complete a reconnaissance level survey of Tazewell and
|
||
North Tazewell’s remaining properties built prior to 1950,
|
||
which have yet to be surveyed. Objective 3 - Promote Public Awareness and Support for Historic
|
||
|
||
Preservation a) Prepare an illustrative handbook to present Historic District
|
||
Design Guidelines and Zoning Regulations and make it
|
||
available to all property owners in the Historic District.
|
||
|
||
b) Encourage citizen efforts to maintain and beautify Main
|
||
Street and encourage citizen adoption of other local streets,
|
||
alleys and historic features.
|
||
|
||
c) Continue to sponsor public awareness efforts and events,
|
||
which encourage a community-wide preservation ethic.
|
||
|
||
d) Coordinate actions of government, the private sector and
|
||
non-profit organizations to achieve preservation goals. Make
|
||
available information regarding federal and state tax
|
||
incentives for preservation and designation procedures.
|
||
|
||
e) Promote voluntary techniques, such as conservation
|
||
easements, which serve to protect historic settings.
|
||
|
||
f) Promote the Tazewell County Historical Society.
|
||
|
||
b) _ Establish a Historic and Architectural Review Board
|
||
|
||
°) Develop, implement and periodically update, as necessary,
|
||
‘Comprehensive Design Review Guidelines to be adopted
|
||
by the Tazewell Board of Historic and Architectural Review.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Continue to Identify and Recognize Historic Properties
|
||
Outside of the Tazewell Historic Preservation (HP) District
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to maintain and enlarge as necessary the
|
||
designation of the Tazewell Historic Preservation (HP)
|
||
District
|
||
|
||
b) Obtain a majority consensus of support among the affected
|
||
|
||
property owners prior to any future enlargement of the
|
||
Historic Preservation (HP) District.
|
||
|
||
c) Sponsor preparation of a National/State Register nomination
|
||
in conjunction with any future enlargement of the
|
||
downtown historic district or designation of additional
|
||
districts.
|
||
|
||
4) Complete a reconnaissance level survey of Tazewell and
|
||
North Tazewell's remaining properties built prior to 1950,
|
||
which have yet to be surveyed.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Promote Public Awareness and Support for Historic
|
||
Preservation
|
||
|
||
a) Prepare an illustrative handbook to present Historic District
|
||
Design Guidelines and Zoning Regulations and make it
|
||
available to all property owners in the Historic District.
|
||
|
||
b) Encourage citizen efforts to maintain and beautify Main
|
||
Street and encourage citizen adoption of other local streets,
|
||
alleys and historic features.
|
||
|
||
©) Continue to sponsor public awareness efforts and events,
|
||
which encourage a community-wide preservation ethic.
|
||
|
||
4d) Coordinate actions of government, the private sector and
|
||
non-profit organizations to achieve preservation goals. Make
|
||
available information regarding federal and state tax
|
||
incentives for preservation and designation procedures.
|
||
|
||
e) Promote voluntary techniques, such as conservation
|
||
‘easements, which serve to protect historic settings.
|
||
|
||
) Promote the Tazewell County Historical Society.
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 53
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 54
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Continue to Encourage and Sponsor Cultural
|
||
Activities in the Tazewell Area.
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to support the facilities, activities and programs
|
||
for all arts organizations in Tazewell and increase public
|
||
awareness of the arts through enhanced marketing and
|
||
communication efforts.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to promote cultural education partnerships with
|
||
local and regional institutions of higher learning , linking
|
||
resources and participants to enhance effectiveness.
|
||
|
||
Objective 5 – Encourage New Opportunities for Cultural Expression
|
||
in and around Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
a) Encourage the improvement of cultural facilities including
|
||
the Historic Crab Orchard Museum and Pioneer Park,
|
||
Higginbotham House, galleries, performing arts center and
|
||
library facilities.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to promote cultural and performing arts as a magnet
|
||
for drawing tourists to Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
c) Establish a permanent venue for music performances and
|
||
festivals by local artists.
|
||
|
||
d) Encourage cooperative initiatives between arts
|
||
organizations and tourist destinations for their mutual
|
||
benefit.
|
||
|
||
e) Promote Tazewell’s historic cemeteries as cultural
|
||
attractions.
|
||
|
||
III. Urban Design Goal: To Protect and Enhance the Visual
|
||
Quality, Design
|
||
Excellence and Distinctive Image of Tazewell. Objective 1 - Communicate a Clear, Succinct Image of Downtown
|
||
Tazewell while Maintaining A Humane, Pedestrian-Scaled
|
||
Environment.
|
||
|
||
a) Evaluate and implement where feasible the urban design
|
||
concepts contained in the Plan for Tazewell’s downtown
|
||
area.
|
||
|
||
b) Develop detailed design plans for a coherent and complete
|
||
downtown community.
|
||
|
||
c) Evaluate and implement where feasible pedestrian mobility
|
||
measures contained in the Plan.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Crab Orchard Museum
|
||
|
||
|
||
Jeffersonville Cemetery
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Continue to Encourage and Sponsor Cultural
|
||
Activities in the Tazewell Area.
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to support the facilities, activities and programs
|
||
for all arts organizations in Tazewell and increase public
|
||
awareness of the arts through enhanced marketing and
|
||
‘communication efforts.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to promote cultural education partnerships with
|
||
local and regional institutions of higher learning, linking
|
||
resources and participants to enhance effectiveness.
|
||
|
||
Objective 5 Encourage New Opportunities for Cultural Expression
|
||
in and around Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
a) Encourage the improvement of cultural facilities including
|
||
the Historic Crab Orchard Museum and Pioneer Park,
|
||
Higginbotham House, galleries, performing arts center and
|
||
library facilities.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to promote cultural and performing arts as a magnet
|
||
for drawing tourists to Tazewell. Crab Orchard Museum
|
||
|
||
©) Establish a permanent venue for music performances and
|
||
festivals by local artists.
|
||
|
||
4) Encourage cooperative initiatives between arts
|
||
‘organizations and tourist destinations for their mutual
|
||
benefit
|
||
|
||
e) Promote Tazewell's historic cemeteries as cultural
|
||
attractions
|
||
|
||
Ill, Urban Design Goal: To Protect and Enhance the Visual
|
||
Quality, Design
|
||
Excellence and Di
|
||
|
||
Jeffersonville Cemetery
|
||
|
||
tive Image of Tazewell
|
||
|
||
Qbjective 1 - Communicate a Clear, Succinct Image of Downtown
|
||
‘Tazewell while Maintaining A Humane, Pedestrian-Scaled
|
||
|
||
Environment.
|
||
|
||
a) Evaluate and implement where feasible the urban design
|
||
concepts contained in the Plan for Tazewell’s downtown
|
||
area.
|
||
|
||
b) Develop detailed design plans for a coherent and complete
|
||
downtown community.
|
||
|
||
©) Evaluate and implement where feasible pedestrian mobility
|
||
|
||
measures contained in the Plan.
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 54
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 55
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Design and Develop Entrance Corridors that Project a
|
||
Clear, Positive Image of Tazewell and Reinforce its Community
|
||
Identity. a) Exercise those powers enabled under the Virginia Code to
|
||
|
||
establish design controls along road corridors leading to
|
||
historically significant areas.
|
||
|
||
b) Establish and implement where feasible “entrance corridor
|
||
guidelines” based on the urban design principles of the
|
||
Plan.
|
||
|
||
c) Aim to improve the appearance and function of both existing
|
||
and newly developing commercial areas including attention
|
||
to landscaping , setbacks, lighting , signage, circulation and
|
||
parking lot design.
|
||
|
||
d) Promote streetscapes that reduce visual clutter and provide
|
||
order. Encourage streetscapes to be developed in stages
|
||
and extended into public spaces by the private sector.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage the relocation of utilities underground along the
|
||
Town’s entrance corridors where economically feasible. Objective 3 - Coordinate and Influence the Physical and Visual
|
||
|
||
Aspects of Development in Growth Areas of Tazewell.. a) Encourage developers and builders to create identity and
|
||
focus for the residential communities in and around
|
||
Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
b) Plant more street trees along public rights-of way and
|
||
encourage owners to do the same on adjacent properties.
|
||
|
||
c) Encourage use of landscaping , earth berms, walls and
|
||
setbacks to provide visual and noise separation of
|
||
subdivisions from U. S. 19/460.
|
||
|
||
d) Encourage public amenities and place-making elements in
|
||
outlying commercial and residential areas, such as water
|
||
features, seating areas and other appropriate measures.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage private developers to incorporate sidewalks and
|
||
walking trails in the major subdivision developments and
|
||
link housing with nearby recreation, retail and community
|
||
facilities.
|
||
|
||
IV. Housing & Neighborhood Development Goals: To Improve
|
||
the Quality, Quantity and Availability of Housing for all Socio-
|
||
Economic Segments of the Population
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Design and Develop Entrance Corridors that Project a
|
||
|
||
Clear, Posi
|
||
|
||
/e Image of Tazewell and Reinforce its Community
|
||
|
||
Identity.
|
||
|
||
a)
|
||
|
||
b)
|
||
|
||
d)
|
||
|
||
e)
|
||
|
||
Exercise those powers enabled under the Virginia Code to
|
||
establish design controls along road corridors leading to
|
||
historically significant areas.
|
||
|
||
Establish and implement where feasible “entrance corridor
|
||
guidelines" based on the urban design principles of the
|
||
Plan.
|
||
|
||
Aim to improve the appearance and function of both existing
|
||
and newly developing commercial areas including attention
|
||
to landscaping, setbacks, lighting, signage, circulation and
|
||
parking lot design.
|
||
|
||
Promote streetscapes that reduce visual clutter and provide
|
||
order. Encourage streetscapes to be developed in stages
|
||
and extended into public spaces by the private sector.
|
||
|
||
Encourage the relocation of utilities underground along the
|
||
Town's entrance corridors where economically feasible.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Coordinate and Influence the Physical and Visual
|
||
Aspects of Development in Growth Areas of Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
a)
|
||
|
||
b)
|
||
|
||
4)
|
||
|
||
Encourage developers and builders to create identity and
|
||
focus for the residential communities in and around
|
||
Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
Plant more street trees along public rights-of way and
|
||
encourage owners to do the same on adjacent properties.
|
||
|
||
Encourage use of landscaping, earth berms, walls and
|
||
setbacks to provide visual and noise separation of
|
||
subdivisions from U. S. 19/460.
|
||
|
||
Encourage public amenities and place-making elements in
|
||
outlying commercial and residential areas, such as water
|
||
features, seating areas and other appropriate measures.
|
||
|
||
Encourage private developers to incorporate sidewalks and
|
||
walking trails in the major subdivision developments and
|
||
link housing with nearby recreation, retail and community
|
||
facilities.
|
||
|
||
IV. Housing & Neighborhood Development Goals: To Improve
|
||
the Quality, Quantity and Availability of Housing for all Socio-
|
||
Economic Segments of the Population
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVE:
|
||
|
||
Page 55
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 56
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
To Preserve, Maintain and Enhance the Integrity and Quality of the
|
||
Neighborhoods. Objective 1 - Maintain and Improve the Physical Condition of the
|
||
Housing Stock a) Continue to actively enforce building construction and
|
||
|
||
reconstruction standards.
|
||
b) Continue to promote rehabilitation and maintenance of older
|
||
|
||
housing units through building code enforcement and
|
||
continuing use of Community Development Block Grant
|
||
funds.
|
||
|
||
c) Continue to demolish and clear abandoned, blighted
|
||
structures that constitute a public safety hazard through
|
||
redevelopment actions, code enforcement and other means
|
||
provided by law.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Ensure and Promote Healthy, Self- Sufficient
|
||
Neighborhoods a) Preserve and revitalize existing residential neighborhoods
|
||
|
||
and improve opportunities for homeownership.
|
||
b) Encourage the strengthening of neighborhood capacity and
|
||
|
||
organization; promote self-sufficiency and interaction among
|
||
neighborhood groups.
|
||
|
||
c) Identify and target for special action “priority neighborhoods”
|
||
that are experiencing decline, development pressures or
|
||
other threats to their stability.
|
||
|
||
d) Encourage the development of master-planned and neo-
|
||
tradit ional neighborhoods which contr ibute to the
|
||
prevention of sprawl.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Increase the Availability of Diverse, Affordable
|
||
Forms of Housing Development
|
||
|
||
a) Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing types
|
||
including apartments, townhouses, duplexes/triplexes, as
|
||
well as small- and large-lot single family.
|
||
|
||
|
||
b) Encourage infill and higher densities of housing where it
|
||
|
||
will not have harmful effects upon the surrounding
|
||
neighborhood.
|
||
|
||
c) Promote residential development within and around the
|
||
downtown district, including where feasible, the adaptive
|
||
|
||
|
||
Townhouse Development
|
||
|
||
To Preserve, Maintain and Enhance the Integrity and Quality of the
|
||
Neighborhoods.
|
||
|
||
Objective 1 - Maintain and Improve the Physical Condition of the
|
||
Housing Stock
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to actively enforce building construction and
|
||
reconstruction standards.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to promote rehabilitation and maintenance of older
|
||
housing units through building code enforcement and
|
||
continuing use of Community Development Block Grant
|
||
funds.
|
||
|
||
©) Continue to demolish and clear abandoned, blighted
|
||
structures that constitute a public safety hazard through
|
||
redevelopment actions, code enforcement and other means
|
||
provided by law.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Ensure and Promote Healthy, Self-Sufficient
|
||
Neighborhoods
|
||
|
||
a) Preserve and revitalize existing residential neighborhoods
|
||
and improve opportunities for homeownership.
|
||
|
||
b) Encourage the strengthening of neighborhood capacity and
|
||
organization; promote self-sufficiency and interaction among
|
||
neighborhood groups.
|
||
|
||
°) Identify and target for special action “priority neighborhoods”
|
||
|
||
that are experiencing decline, development pressures or
|
||
other threats to their stability.
|
||
|
||
4) Encourage the development of master-planned and neo-
|
||
traditional neighborhoods which contribute to the
|
||
prevention of sprawl.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Increase the Availability of Diverse, Affordable
|
||
Forms of Housing Development
|
||
|
||
a) Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing types
|
||
including apartments, townhouses, duplexes/triplexes, as
|
||
well as small- and large-lot single family.
|
||
|
||
b) Encourage infill and higher densities of housing where it
|
||
will not have harmful effects upon the surrounding
|
||
neighborhood.
|
||
|
||
©) Promote residential development within and around the
|
||
downtown district, including where feasible, the adaptive
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
|
||
Townhouse Development
|
||
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
P:
|
||
|
||
rage 56
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 57
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
reuse of upper-story storefronts, institutional buildings and related
|
||
structures for apartments, elderly housing, live-work space, and other
|
||
specialty residential/mixed uses.
|
||
d) Encourage private, non-profit housing groups to participate
|
||
in the provision of affordable housing in town.
|
||
Objective 4 - Expand Housing Opportunities for Low and Moderate
|
||
Income, Elderly and Disabled Residents. a) Continue to support the activities of the Town and the
|
||
Tazewell County Department of Social Services to provide safe,
|
||
decent and affordable assisted housing .
|
||
b) Encourage the Town to seek state and federal financing to
|
||
expand housing opportunities for low income, disabled and elderly
|
||
residents.
|
||
c) Encourage the construction of retirement housing , assisted
|
||
living centers and other housing to meet the needs of a growing
|
||
elderly and “special needs” population.
|
||
d) Support efforts to provide coordinated home care services
|
||
for persons with a disability and their families.
|
||
|
||
V. Transportation Goal: To Provide a Safe, Effective and Efficient
|
||
Transportation System Serving Automobile, Pedestrian and Bicycle
|
||
Traffic, While Respecting the Environment and Scale of the
|
||
Historic Areas and
|
||
|
||
Surrounding
|
||
Neighborhoods.
|
||
|
||
Objective 1 - Improve the Flow of Traffic Throughout the Town a) Work with VDOT under the 2020 Transportation Plan to
|
||
develop priority Transportation System Management (TSM)
|
||
improvements for Tazewell’s most congested arterials.
|
||
|
||
b) Evaluate and implement where feasible recommendations
|
||
shown on the Transportation Plan which improve circulation
|
||
through widening of roads and turning radii at various
|
||
intersections
|
||
|
||
c) Study and pursue opportunities to complete alternative
|
||
routes connecting Tazewell with North Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Eliminate Hazardous Traffic and Street Conditions &
|
||
Improve Parking Availability.
|
||
|
||
a) Promote the orderly development of Tazewell’s U.S. 19/
|
||
460 corridor and interchanges by planning for and
|
||
incorporating design standards and enhancement measures.
|
||
|
||
reuse of upper-story storefronts, institutional buildings and related
|
||
structures for apartments, elderly housing, live-work space, and other
|
||
specialty residential/mixed uses.
|
||
|
||
d) Encourage private, non-profit housing groups to participate
|
||
in the provision of affordable housing in town.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Expand Housing Opportunities for Low and Moderate
|
||
Income, Elderly and Disabled Residents.
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to support the activities of the Town and the
|
||
Tazewell County Department of Social Services to provide safe,
|
||
decent and affordable assisted housing.
|
||
|
||
b) Encourage the Town to seek state and federal financing to
|
||
expand housing opportunities for low income, disabled and elderly
|
||
residents.
|
||
|
||
°) Encourage the construction of retirement housing, assisted
|
||
living centers and other housing to meet the needs of a growing
|
||
elderly and "special needs” population.
|
||
|
||
4) Support efforts to provide coordinated home care services
|
||
for persons with a disability and their families.
|
||
|
||
\V. Itansportation Goal: To Provide a Safe, Effective and Efficient
|
||
‘Transportation System Serving Automobile, Pedestrian and Bicycle
|
||
Traffic, While Respecting the Environment and Scale of the
|
||
Historic Areas and
|
||
Surrounding
|
||
Neighborhoods.
|
||
Objective 4 - Improve the Flow of Traffic Throughout the Town
|
||
|
||
a) Work with VDOT under the 2020 Transportation Plan to
|
||
develop priority Transportation System Management (TSM)
|
||
improvements for Tazewell’s most congested arterials.
|
||
|
||
b) Evaluate andimplement where feasible recommendations
|
||
shown on the Transportation Plan which improve circulation
|
||
through widening of roads and turning radii at various
|
||
intersections
|
||
|
||
©) Study and pursue opportunities to complete alternative
|
||
routes connecting Tazewell with North Tazewell
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Eliminate Hazardous Traffic and Street Conditions &
|
||
Improve Parking Availability.
|
||
|
||
a) Promote the orderly development of Tazewell’s U.S. 19/
|
||
460 corridor and interchanges by planning for and
|
||
incorporating design standards and enhancement measures.
|
||
|
||
GOAI
|
||
OBJECTIVE:
|
||
Page 57
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 58
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
b) Restrict ingress and egress at major shopping centers to
|
||
limited points of access including a signalized, controlled
|
||
entrance wherever feasible.
|
||
|
||
c) Upgrade substandard street sections in older areas of town
|
||
in coordination with other utility and infrastructure
|
||
improvements.
|
||
|
||
d) Participate in evaluating the need for off-street parking
|
||
facilities in the downtown area.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Promote Alternative Types of Transportation Facilities a) Evaluate and implement where feasible recommendations
|
||
of the Greenways and Trails Plan.
|
||
|
||
b) Prepare and implement a comprehensive Bicycle Facility
|
||
Plan for the Tazewell area. Enlist the assistance of the
|
||
Cumberland Plateau PDC and VDOT in preparing the
|
||
Bicycle Plan.
|
||
|
||
c) Work with developers and landowners to develop a safe
|
||
and complete network of neighborhood sidewalks for access
|
||
to schools, Lincolnshire Park and community facilities.
|
||
|
||
d) Avoid widening and other potentially disruptive street
|
||
improvements in the historic area to minimize negative
|
||
impacts and possible damage to historic buildings.
|
||
|
||
e) Undertake a Pedestrian Safety Study of the downtown area
|
||
to make recommendations regarding crosswalk location,
|
||
access for the disabled, pedestrian signals at intersections,
|
||
reconstruction needs, obstructions, adequate lighting and
|
||
other pedestrian issues.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Improve Private & Public Transit Services a) Promote the use of park-and-ride lots to encourage
|
||
continued car-pooling and ride-sharing .
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to support the expansion and improvement of
|
||
the Tazewell County Airport.
|
||
|
||
VI. Community Facilities Goal: To Provide An Appropriate Level
|
||
And Variety of Community Facilities And Services To Enhance The
|
||
Quality of Life for Tazewell Area Residents.
|
||
|
||
Objective 1 - Continue to Improve and Expand the Tazewell Sewer
|
||
System to Meet Present and Future Needs.
|
||
|
||
b) Restrict ingress and egress at major shopping centers to
|
||
limited points of access including a signalized, controlled
|
||
entrance wherever feasible.
|
||
|
||
°) Upgrade substandard street sections in older areas of town
|
||
in coordination with other utility and infrastructure
|
||
improvements.
|
||
|
||
¢) Participate in evaluating the need for off-street parking
|
||
|
||
facilities in the downtown area.
|
||
Objective 3 - Promote Alternative Types of Transportation Facilities
|
||
|
||
a) Evaluate and implement where feasible recommendations
|
||
of the Greenways and Trails Plan.
|
||
|
||
b) Prepare and implementa comprehensive Bicycle Facility
|
||
Plan for the Tazewell area. Enlistthe assistance of the
|
||
Cumberland Plateau PDC and VDOT in preparing the
|
||
Bicycle Plan,
|
||
|
||
©) Work with developers and landowners to develop a safe
|
||
and complete network of neighborhood sidewalks for access
|
||
to schools, Lincolnshire Park and community facilities.
|
||
|
||
4) Avoid widening and other potentially disruptive street
|
||
improvements in the historic area to minimize negative
|
||
impacts and possible damage to historic buildings.
|
||
|
||
e) Undertake a Pedestrian Safety Study of the downtown area
|
||
to make recommendations regarding crosswalk location,
|
||
access for the disabled, pedestrian signals at intersections,
|
||
reconstruction needs, obstructions, adequate lighting and
|
||
other pedestrian issues.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Improve Private & Public Transit Services
|
||
|
||
a) Promote the use of park-and-ride lots to encourage
|
||
continued car-pooling and ride-sharing.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to support the expansion and improvement of
|
||
the Tazewell County Airport.
|
||
|
||
VI. Community Facilities Goal: To Provide An Appropriate Level
|
||
And Variety of Community Facilities And Services To Enhance The
|
||
Quality of Life for Tazewell Area Residents.
|
||
|
||
Objective 1 - Continue to Improve and Expand the Tazewell Sewer
|
||
‘System to Meet Present and Future Needs.
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
P:
|
||
|
||
age 58
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 59
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
a) Complete improvements to the sanitary sewer collection
|
||
system; including infiltration/inflow reduction in sewer
|
||
sheds, and service extensions to sewer problem areas in
|
||
and around Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
b) Explore the potential for the Tazewell County Public Service
|
||
Authority as the entity that operates the Town’s Wastewater
|
||
Treatment Facility.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Continue to Provide an Adequate, Cost-Efficient Range
|
||
of Municipal Services in Conjunction with other Service Providers
|
||
and Volunteer Organizations.
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to provide cost-effective solid waste collection
|
||
and recycling services to all town residents.
|
||
|
||
b) Insist on orderly improvement and expansion of the water
|
||
system by the Tazewell County Public Service Authority to
|
||
meet present and future needs including adequate fire
|
||
protection.
|
||
|
||
c) Ensure the public safety of town residents by continuing to
|
||
provide an adequately-sized, well-trained police force.
|
||
|
||
d) Continue to support the Tazewell Fire Department and
|
||
encourage the local emergency rescue services.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Continue to Provide Special Service Amenities and
|
||
Programs Commensurate with Tazewell’s Role as a Municipal
|
||
Leader.
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to maintain a high standard for all the Town’s
|
||
municipal buildings and grounds.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to improve Lincolnshire Park and its recreation
|
||
system, with a wide variety of facilities for use by area
|
||
residents and visitors.
|
||
|
||
c) Continue to preserve, enhance and maintain certain natural
|
||
features, historic qualities and natural terrain in the Town’s
|
||
park and open space system.
|
||
|
||
d) Provide new opportunities for neighborhood parks,
|
||
greenways and multi-use trails.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Provide Storm Drainage Improvements and Control
|
||
Future Development in Identified Flood Hazard Areas. a) Continue to provide public storm drainage improvements
|
||
|
||
in priority problem areas.
|
||
|
||
a) Complete improvements to the sanitary sewer collection
|
||
system; including infiltration/inflow reduction in sewer
|
||
sheds, and service extensions to sewer problem areas in
|
||
and around Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
b) _Explore the potential for the Tazewell County Public Service
|
||
Authority as the entity that operates the Town's Wastewater
|
||
Treatment Facility.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Continue to Provide an Adequate, Cost-Efficient Range
|
||
of Municipal Services in Conjunction with other Service Providers
|
||
and Volunteer Organizations.
|
||
|
||
2) Continue to provide cost-effective solid waste collection
|
||
and recycling services to all town residents.
|
||
|
||
b) _Insist on orderly improvement and expansion of the water
|
||
system by the Tazewell County Public Service Authority to
|
||
meet present and future needs including adequate fire
|
||
protection.
|
||
|
||
°) Ensure the public safety of town residents by continuing to
|
||
provide an adequately-sized, well-trained police force.
|
||
|
||
4) Continue to support the Tazewell Fire Department and
|
||
encourage the local emergency rescue services.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Continue to Provide Special Service Amenities and
|
||
Programs Commensurate with Tazewell’s Role as a Municipal
|
||
Leader.
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to maintain a high standard for all the Town's
|
||
municipal buildings and grounds.
|
||
|
||
b) Continue to improve Lincolnshire Park and its recreation
|
||
system, with a wide variety of facilities for use by area
|
||
residents and visitors.
|
||
|
||
c) Continue to preserve, enhance and maintain certain natural
|
||
features, historic qualities and natural terrain in the Town's
|
||
park and open space system.
|
||
|
||
4) Provide new opportunities for neighborhood parks,
|
||
greenways and multi-use trails.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Provide Storm Drainage Improvements and Control
|
||
|
||
Future Development in Identified Flood Hazard Areas.
|
||
|
||
a) Continue to provide public storm drainage improvements
|
||
in priority problem areas.
|
||
|
||
GO,
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
Page 59
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 60
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
b) Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a Storm water
|
||
Management Utility. Upon implementation, require
|
||
development projects to assume responsibil ity for
|
||
storm water runoff either through incorporation of measures
|
||
on-site, financial contribution to the public utility system,
|
||
or an appropriate combination of both.
|
||
|
||
c) Consider establishing a neighborhood drainage program to
|
||
address smaller problems assesses equitable user fees
|
||
and recover program costs.
|
||
|
||
d) Limit development adjacent to the Clinch River and avoid
|
||
closed channelization of Tazewell’s lesser creeks and
|
||
tributaries.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage where practical on private property and implement
|
||
where practical on public property the use of permeable
|
||
paving, perforated paving blocks, rain gardens and other
|
||
innovative mechanisms to reduce run-off from impervious
|
||
surfaces.
|
||
|
||
VII. Land Use & Environmental Goal: To Achieve a Balanced
|
||
Land Use Pattern that Retains Tazewell’s Small Town Character
|
||
while Accommodating Quality Growth in a Planned Manner.
|
||
|
||
Objective 1 - Provide and Maintain Adequate Land Areas for
|
||
Orderly, Compatible and Efficient Land Use Development.
|
||
|
||
a) Update and implement a Land Use Plan to define land
|
||
areas best suited to accommodate future needs for
|
||
residential, institutional, commercial, industrial and open
|
||
space activities.
|
||
|
||
b) Insure that future business and employment centers do
|
||
not adversely affect or overburden the public facilities,
|
||
environment or existing town character of Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
c) Review, update and enforce the Zoning Ordinance in
|
||
conjunction with revisions to the Comprehensive Plan to
|
||
ensure harmonious and orderly development of land within
|
||
the town.
|
||
|
||
d) Strengthen cooperation between the Town and County is
|
||
sharing land use information and staff expertise, and in
|
||
coordinating site plan review of projects and proposals
|
||
impacting both jurisdictions.
|
||
|
||
b) Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a Storm water
|
||
Management Utility. Upon implementation, require
|
||
development projects to assume responsibility for
|
||
storm water runoffeeither through incorporation of measures
|
||
on-site, financial contribution to the public utility system,
|
||
oran appropriate combination of both.
|
||
|
||
©) Consider establishing a neighborhood drainage program to
|
||
address smaller problems assesses equitable user fees
|
||
and recover program costs.
|
||
|
||
4) Limit development adjacent to the Clinch River and avoid
|
||
closed channelization of Tazewell’s lesser creeks and
|
||
tributaries.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage where practical on private property and implement
|
||
|
||
where practical on public property the use of permeable
|
||
paving, perforated paving blocks, rain gardens and other
|
||
innovative mechanisms to reduce run-off from impervious
|
||
surfaces.
|
||
|
||
VII. Land Use & Environmental Goal: To Achieve a Balanced
|
||
|
||
Land Use Pattern that Retains Tazewell’s Small Town Character
|
||
while Accommodating Quality Growth in a Planned Manner.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Provide and Maintain Adequate Land Areas for
|
||
Orderly, Compatible and Efficient Land Use Development.
|
||
|
||
a) Update and implement a Land Use Plan to define land
|
||
areas best suited to accommodate future needs for
|
||
residential, institutional, commercial, industrial and open
|
||
space activities.
|
||
|
||
b) Insure that future business and employment centers do
|
||
not adversely affect or overburden the public facilities,
|
||
environment or existing town character of Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
°) Review, update and enforce the Zoning Ordinance in
|
||
conjunction with revisions to the Comprehensive Plan to
|
||
ensure harmonious and orderly development of land within
|
||
the town.
|
||
|
||
4) Strengthen cooperation between the Town and County is
|
||
sharing land use information and staff expertise, and in
|
||
coordinating site plan review of projects and proposals
|
||
impacting both jurisdictions.
|
||
|
||
GO,
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
Page 60
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 61
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Reduce and Avoid Conflicting Land Uses a) Employ multifamily or office uses as transitional areas
|
||
between single-family neighborhoods and more intensive
|
||
land uses.
|
||
|
||
b) Concentrate and cluster highway-oriented commercial
|
||
activities to minimize traffic hazards and adverse visual
|
||
impacts. Restrict highway development to limited points
|
||
of access.
|
||
|
||
c) Address objectionable aspects of an industrial use through
|
||
buffering/setback regulations and realistic, equitably applied
|
||
performance standards.
|
||
|
||
d) Promote redevelopment of vacant or underutilized industrial
|
||
properties in North Tazewell and direct new manufacturing
|
||
to the area’s professionally planned industrial parks.
|
||
|
||
e) Encourage development of a diversity of housing types and
|
||
densit ies in a manner compatible with exist ing
|
||
neighborhoods.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Protect the Natural Environment from Inappropriate
|
||
Development and Use the Natural Setting to Enhance the Man-
|
||
Made Environment.
|
||
|
||
a) Preserve the Clinch River and its tributary drainage ways,
|
||
plus adjacent areas of steep terrain, as an open space
|
||
network.
|
||
|
||
b) Retain trees on hillsides and ridgelines for purposes of
|
||
screening and to preserve visual character.
|
||
|
||
c) Incorporate significant landscape features, both natural and
|
||
man-made, into new site designs.
|
||
|
||
d) Avoid development or expansion of natural resource
|
||
extraction areas where incompatible to existing or proposed
|
||
development.
|
||
|
||
e) Protect vistas to and from historical buildings and areas
|
||
when development occurs.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Ensure Environmentally Sound Construction Practices a) Adapt development to the topography and natural setting
|
||
rather than modifying them to accommodate development.
|
||
Excessive grading , cutting and filling should be discouraged
|
||
while imaginative and sensit ive design should be
|
||
encouraged.
|
||
|
||
Objective 2 - Reduce and Avoid Conflicting Land Uses
|
||
|
||
a)
|
||
|
||
b)
|
||
|
||
3)
|
||
|
||
Employ multifamily or office uses as transitionalareas
|
||
between single-family neighborhoods and more intensive
|
||
land uses.
|
||
|
||
Concentrate and cluster highway-oriented commercial
|
||
activities to minimize traffic hazards and adverse visual
|
||
impacts. Restrict highway development to limited points
|
||
of access.
|
||
|
||
Address objectionable aspects of an industrial use through
|
||
buffering/setback regulations and realistic, equitably applied
|
||
performance standards,
|
||
|
||
Promote redevelopment of vacant or underutilized industrial
|
||
properties in North Tazewell and direct new manufacturing
|
||
to the area's professionally planned industrial parks.
|
||
|
||
Encourage development of a diversity of housing types and
|
||
densities in a manner compatible with existing
|
||
neighborhoods.
|
||
|
||
Objective 3 - Protect the Natural Environment from Inappropriate
|
||
Development and Use the Natural Setting to Enhance the Man-
|
||
Made Environment.
|
||
|
||
a)
|
||
|
||
e)
|
||
|
||
Preserve the Clinch River andits tributary drainage ways,
|
||
plus adjacent areas of steep terrain, as an open space
|
||
network.
|
||
|
||
Retain trees on hillsides and ridgelinesfor purposes of
|
||
screening and to preserve visual character.
|
||
|
||
Incorporate significant landscape features, both natural and
|
||
man-made, into new site designs.
|
||
|
||
Avoid development or expansion of natural resource
|
||
extraction areas where incompatible to existing or proposed
|
||
development.
|
||
|
||
Protect vistas to and from historical buildings and areas
|
||
when development occurs.
|
||
|
||
Objective 4 - Ensure Environmentally Sound Construction Practices
|
||
|
||
a)
|
||
|
||
Adapt development to the topography and natural setting
|
||
rather than modifying them to accommodate development.
|
||
Excessive grading, cutting and filling should be discouraged
|
||
while imaginative and sensitive design should be
|
||
encouraged,
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
P:
|
||
|
||
age 61
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 62
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
b) Develop and implement Best Management Practices for
|
||
urban streams in Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
c) Enforce, review and periodically update the Subdivision
|
||
Ordinance to ensure that new development is soundly
|
||
engineered with regard to street construction, lot layout,
|
||
drainage control and buffering .
|
||
|
||
d) Ensure submission and compliance with all erosion and
|
||
sedimentation control plans required under building permits
|
||
and for excavation work.
|
||
|
||
e) Ensure submission and compliance with all drainage plans
|
||
required for handling of on- and off-site drainage.
|
||
|
||
1 For purposes of this Plan, the “downtown area” refers to the entire central
|
||
core of Tazewell, including the central business district, the courthouse area
|
||
and the immediate adjoining neighborhoods.
|
||
|
||
b) Develop and implement Best Management Practices for
|
||
urban streams in Tazewell.
|
||
|
||
°) Enforce, review and periodically update the Subdivision
|
||
Ordinance to ensure that new development is soundly
|
||
engineered with regard to street construction, lot layout,
|
||
drainage control and buffering.
|
||
|
||
d) Ensure submission and compliance with all erosion and
|
||
sedimentation control plans required under building permits
|
||
land for excavation work.
|
||
|
||
e) Ensure submission and compliance with all drainage plans
|
||
required for handling of on- and off-site drainage.
|
||
|
||
+ For purposes of this Plan, the “downtown area” refersto the entire central
|
||
core of Tazewell, including the central business district, the courthouse area
|
||
and the immediate adjoining neighborhoods.
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
Page 62
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN ELEMENTS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN ELEMENTS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 63
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION + DEVELOPMENT INTRODUCTION The following chapter provides a summary of current and potential
|
||
community development activities that contribute directly to the area’s
|
||
social and economic prosperity. These include downtown revitalization,
|
||
historic preservation, commercial and institutional building adaptive
|
||
reuse, lodging/conference center development, housing rehabilitation
|
||
and neighborhood improvements.
|
||
|
||
DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION
|
||
Over the past several years, town officials, historic preservation advocates
|
||
and business leaders have implemented a number of strategies to
|
||
improve the downtown area. Like most downtowns of its era, Tazewell’s
|
||
retail core began to face stiff economic competition from outlying
|
||
shopping centers. Downtown property owners became cautious about
|
||
re investment, bui ld ing main tenance was deferred, and pub l ic
|
||
infrastructure showed signs of obsolescence.
|
||
|
||
A 1996 Downtown Master Plan adopted by the Town Council proposed
|
||
a number of improvements to the downtown area. Based on this
|
||
planning framework, the Town proceeded with selected projects. The
|
||
first major undertaking was to place overhead power lines underground.
|
||
The second undertaking was the renovation of the County Courthouse
|
||
and construction of a new jail with a parking lot behind it. Currently,
|
||
physical improvements are ongoing with streetscape improvements on
|
||
Main Street and adjoining side streets. The improvements include period
|
||
lighting , landscaping , brick sidewalks and development of a mini-park
|
||
at the intersection of Main Street and Marion Avenue.
|
||
|
||
The Town has also developed organizational and promotional strategies
|
||
to support downtown development. Members of the Tazewell County
|
||
Historical Society, the Tazewell Area Chamber of Commerce and
|
||
Tazewell Tourism have played an integral role in promoting the historic
|
||
downtown. One example of an effort to promote the downtown has
|
||
been the development and dissemination of a Walking Tour of Main
|
||
Street brochure by the Historical Society.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS Continued enhancements to downtown Tazewell are needed and
|
||
recommended throughout this Plan. While downtown has undergone
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION +
|
||
DEVELOPMENT
|
||
|
||
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
||
The following chapter provides a summary of current and potential
|
||
community development activities that contribute directly to the area's
|
||
social and economic prosperity. These include downtown revitalization,
|
||
historic preservation, commercial and institutional building adaptive
|
||
reuse, lodging/conference center development, housing rehabilitation
|
||
and neighborhood improvements.
|
||
|
||
DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION
|
||
|
||
Over the past several years, town officials, historic preservation advocates
|
||
and business leaders have implemented a number of strategies to
|
||
improve the downtown area. Like most downtowns of its era, Tazewell’s
|
||
retail core began to face stiff economic competition from outlying
|
||
shopping centers. Downtown property owners became cautious about
|
||
reinvestment, building maintenance was deferred, and public
|
||
infrastructure showed signs of obsolescence.
|
||
|
||
A1996 Downtown Master Plan adopted by the Town Council proposed
|
||
a number of improvements to the downtown area. Basedon this
|
||
planning framework, the Town proceeded with selected projects. The
|
||
first major undertaking was to place overhead power lines underground.
|
||
The second undertaking was the renovation of the County Courthouse
|
||
and construction of a new jail with a parkinglot behind it. Currently,
|
||
physical improvements are ongoing with streetscape improvements on
|
||
Main Street and adjoining side streets. The improvements include period
|
||
lighting, landscaping, brick sidewalks and development of a mini-park
|
||
at the intersection of Main Street and Marion Avenue.
|
||
|
||
The Town has also developed organizational and promotional strategies
|
||
to supportdowntown development. Members of the Tazewell County
|
||
Historical Society, the Tazewell Area Chamber of Commerce and
|
||
Tazewell Tourism have played an integral role in promoting the historic
|
||
downtown. One example of an effort to promote the downtown has
|
||
been the development and dissemination of a Walking Tour of Main
|
||
Street brochure by the Historical Society.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS
|
||
|
||
Continued enhancements to downtown Tazewell are needed and
|
||
recommended throughout this Plan. While downtown has undergone
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 63
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
Page 64
|
||
|
||
substantial physical improvement in recent years, the area still has some
|
||
economic deficiencies including an increased vacancy rate for buildings
|
||
along Main Street. Further, the extent of vacant/underutilized space
|
||
increases measurably when upper stories are considered. Thus, in future
|
||
years the Town and its downtown organizations must strongly focus on
|
||
economic restructuring so that greater activity levels and building
|
||
absorption rates are achieved. These efforts should generally include
|
||
an emphasis on micro-enterprise and small business development, a
|
||
comprehensive tourism campaign and promotion of projects that convert
|
||
unused space into downtown housing , offices or cultural facilities.
|
||
|
||
HISTORIC PRESERVATION Nominated to the state and national historic registers in 2001 and
|
||
certified in 2002, the downtown Historic District is recognized for its
|
||
many period buildings and well-preserved neighborhoods. In addition,
|
||
Tazewell’s historic downtown and residential areas contribute greatly to
|
||
the town’s overall quality of life. Many local homes, storefronts,
|
||
commercial and institutional buildings have been skillfully restored over
|
||
the years and updated for contemporary use. Because of these ongoing
|
||
revitalization efforts, the older areas of town offer a vibrant, distinctive
|
||
atmosphere in which to work and live.
|
||
|
||
Statement of Significance The Tazewell Historic District is representative of the area’s commercial
|
||
and residential development from 1832 to 1950. From its modest
|
||
beginning , the town prospered from the 1870s to the mid-20th century
|
||
as the commercial and institutional heart of Tazewell County. Preserved
|
||
in the district are a courthouse, jail, post office, school, fraternal lodge
|
||
and several churches. In addition to its governmental/institutional
|
||
heritage, the district is significant for its late Victorian commercial and
|
||
residential architecture and for its variety of vernacular dwellings. Houses
|
||
in the district range from the highly decorative Queen-Anne style
|
||
mansions to bungalows located along Pine, Tower, Church Streets and
|
||
Central Avenue. Altogether, the district contains 112 contributing
|
||
buildings, 31 non-contributing buildings, and 2 non-contributing structures
|
||
|
||
Summary Description of the District As depicted on the Historic District Map the Tazewell Historic District
|
||
encompasses a sizeable area within the downtown. It is comprised of
|
||
residential, public, semi-public and commercial uses.
|
||
|
||
Downtown District
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s downtown district contains many of the community ’s most
|
||
valued historic buildings. Victorian Italianate, Queen Anne, Greek,
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GOALS +
|
||
|
||
OBJECTIVES
|
||
|
||
substantial physical improvement in recent years, the area still has some
|
||
economic deficiencies including an increased vacancy rate for buildings
|
||
along Main Street. Further, the extent of vacant/Junderutilized space
|
||
increases measurably when upper stories are considered. Thus, in future
|
||
years the Town and its downtown organizations must strongly focus on
|
||
economic restructuring so that greater activity levels and building
|
||
absorption rates are achieved. These efforts should generally include
|
||
an emphasis on micro-enterprise and small business development, a
|
||
‘comprehensive tourism campaign and promotion of projects that convert
|
||
unused space into downtown housing, offices or cultural facilities.
|
||
|
||
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
Nominated to the state and national historic registers in 2001 and
|
||
certified in 2002, the downtown Historic District is recognized for its
|
||
many period buildings and well-preserved neighborhoods. In addition,
|
||
Tazewell’s historic downtown and residential areas contribute greatly to
|
||
the town’s overall quality of life. Many local homes, storefronts,
|
||
‘commercial and institutional buildings have been skillfully restored over
|
||
the years and updated for contemporary use. Because of these ongoing
|
||
revitalization efforts, the older areas of town offer a vibrant,
|
||
atmosphere in which to work and live.
|
||
|
||
Statement of Significance
|
||
|
||
The Tazewell Historic Districts representative of the area's commercial
|
||
and residential development from 1832 to 1950. From its modest
|
||
beginning, the town prospered from the 1870s to the mid-20th century
|
||
as the commercial and institutional heart of Tazewell County. Preserved
|
||
in the district area courthouse, jail, postoffice, school, fraternal lodge
|
||
and several churches. In addition to its governmental/institutional
|
||
heritage, the districtis significant for its late Victorian commercial and
|
||
residential architecture and for its variety of vernacular dwellings. Houses
|
||
in the district range from the highly decorative Queen-Anne style
|
||
mansions to bungalows located along Pine, Tower, Church Streets and
|
||
Central Avenue. Altogether, the district contains 112 contributing
|
||
buildings, 31 non-contributing buildings, and 2 non-contributing structures
|
||
|
||
Summary Description of the District
|
||
|
||
As depicted on the Historic District Map the Tazewell Historic District
|
||
encompasses a sizeable area within the downtown. It is comprised of
|
||
residential, public, semi-public and commercial uses.
|
||
|
||
Downtown District
|
||
|
||
Tazewell's downtown district contains many of the community's most
|
||
valued historic buildings. Victorian Italianate, Queen Anne, Greek,
|
||
|
||
Page 64
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
|
||
TOWN OF TAZWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
Hopkins St.
|
||
|
||
Bishop Ave/Broadway St.
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
Town of Tazewell Corporate Limits
|
||
|
||
|
||
Transitional Neighborhoods
|
||
Deteriorating Neighborhoods
|
||
Downtown Revitalization
|
||
Adaptive Reuse/Redevelopment
|
||
Industrial Development
|
||
Community/Regional Development
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
Hopkins St.
|
||
|
||
Blacksburg St.
|
||
|
||
St/ Maple St
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
Town of Tazewell Corporate Limits
|
||
|
||
i Transitional Neighborhoods
|
||
|
||
B Deteriorating Neighborhoods
|
||
Downtown Revitalization
|
||
|
||
B Adaptive Reuse/Redevelopment
|
||
BB industrial Development
|
||
|
||
i Community/Regional Development
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Gothic and Colonial Revival and Bungalow/Craftsman styles represent
|
||
the commercial, institutional and residential architecture. Most of the
|
||
commercial district is characterized by compact, two-story brick buildings
|
||
dating from the 1870s to the early 1900s. The structures typically possess
|
||
modernized storefronts with preserved upper-story facades that are
|
||
highlighted with cast iron cornices, round-arched transoms and other
|
||
decorative features. Prominent early structures include the Old Jail
|
||
Building (1832), the Clinch Valley News Building (1878), the Greever
|
||
and Gillespie Law Office Building (1897), and the Graham Building
|
||
(1902). Over the years, periodic fires and demolition of outdated
|
||
buildings allowed for construction of some stylish early-20th century
|
||
buildings, including the County Courthouse (1913), Tazewell High School
|
||
(1931), Tazewell Masonic Lodge (1931) and Tazewell Post Office (1936).
|
||
|
||
Residences in the district are primarily located north of Main Street.
|
||
Houses most noted for their architecture include the Preston House
|
||
(1894), the Joseph Stras Gillespie House (1892), and the C. R. Brown
|
||
House (1903). The majority of the houses along Pine and Tower Streets
|
||
include forms such as bungalows, American Foursquare houses, and
|
||
derivations of Tudor Revival- and Colonial Revival- style dwellings.
|
||
Buildings along Main Street that were once residences but have been
|
||
converted to other uses include the Dr. C.W. Greever House (1876),
|
||
which now serves as the home of the Tazewell County Historical Society
|
||
and the Dr. J. R. Gildersleeve House (1877), which now houses the
|
||
County Department of Economic Development.
|
||
|
||
Since 1994, the downtown area has been the focus of considerable
|
||
revitalization efforts, and the Town has actively promoted preservation-
|
||
based strategies.
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS Maintaining the historic character of the commercial, institutional and
|
||
residential structures in the Downtown Historic District should be
|
||
accomplished through the designation of a Historic Preservation Overlay
|
||
Zoning District, the establishment of an Architectural Review Board
|
||
and the development and adoption of Design Guidelines for the
|
||
rehabilitation of existing structures and the construction of new buildings.
|
||
As an incentive for property owners and developers to preserve historic
|
||
structures, the Town should promote the use of historic tax credits and
|
||
establish/fund a façade improvement grant/loan program to rehabilitate
|
||
commercial buildings in the downtown Historic District. As a means of
|
||
supplementing the Town funded facade program, it should seek planning
|
||
and construction funds from the Virginia Community Development Block
|
||
Grant Program (CDBG) under the Business District Revitalization category.
|
||
Other potential sources of funds for historic building rehabilitation include
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Historical Society Building
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
Piggy Bank Café-Downtown
|
||
|
||
Gothic and Colonial Revival and Bungalow/Craftsman styles represent
|
||
the commercial, institutional and residential architecture. Most of the
|
||
commercial district is characterized by compact, two-story brick buildings
|
||
dating from the 1870s to the early 1900s. The structures typically possess
|
||
modernized storefronts with preserved upper-story facades that are
|
||
highlighted with cast iron cornices, round-arched transoms and other
|
||
decorative features. Prominent early structures include the Old Jail
|
||
Building (1832), the Clinch Valley News Building (1878), the Greever
|
||
and Gillespie Law Office Building (1897), and the Graham Building
|
||
(1902). Over the years, periodic fires and demolition of outdated
|
||
buildings allowed for construction of some stylish early-20th century
|
||
buildings, including the County Courthouse (1913), Tazewell High School
|
||
(1931), Tazewell Masonic Lodge (1931) and Tazewell Post Office (1936).
|
||
|
||
Residences in the district are primarily located north of Main Street.
|
||
Houses most noted for their architecture include the Preston House
|
||
(1894), the Joseph Stras Gillespie House (1892), and the C. R. Brown
|
||
House (1903). The majority of the houses along Pine and Tower Streets
|
||
include forms such as bungalows, American Foursquare houses, and
|
||
derivations of Tudor Revival-and Colonial Revival-style dwellings.
|
||
Buildings along Main Street that were once residences but have been
|
||
converted to other uses include the Dr. C.W. Greever House (1876),
|
||
which now serves as the home of the Tazewell County Historical Society
|
||
and the Dr. J. R. Gildersleeve House (1877), which now houses the
|
||
County Department of Economic Development.
|
||
|
||
Since 1994, the downtown area has been the focus of considerable
|
||
revitalization efforts, and the Town has actively promoted preservation-
|
||
based strategies.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS
|
||
|
||
Maintaining the historic character of the commercial, institutional and
|
||
residential structures in the Downtown Historic District should be
|
||
accomplished through the designation of a Historic Preservation Overlay
|
||
Zoning District, the establishment of an Architectural Review Board
|
||
and the development and adoption of Design Guidelines for the
|
||
rehabilitation of existing structures and the construction of new buildings,
|
||
As an incentive for property owners and developers to preserve historic
|
||
structures, the Town should promote the use of historic tax credits and
|
||
establish/fund a fagade improvement grant/loan program to rehabilitate
|
||
‘commercial buildings in the downtown Historic District. As a means of
|
||
supplementing the Town funded facade program, it should seek planning
|
||
and construction funds from the Virginia Community Development Block
|
||
Grant Program (CDBG) under the Business District Revitalization category.
|
||
Other potential sources of funds for historic building rehabilitation include
|
||
|
||
Piggy Bank Café-Downtown
|
||
|
||
Historical Society Building
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Page 65
|
||
|
||
Page 65
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) and the Virginia Tobacco
|
||
Indemnification and Community Revitalization Commission (Tobacco
|
||
Commission).
|
||
|
||
Opportunities for the designation of additional historic structures and
|
||
districts on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of
|
||
Historic Places should be explored. In particular, an architectural and
|
||
historic survey of structures in North Tazewell in the area of the Train
|
||
Depot and along Railroad Avenue should be initiated. A potential source
|
||
of funding for this survey is the Virginia Department of Historic
|
||
Resources. REDEVELOPMENT/CONSERVATION AREAS Redevelopment is the process of identifying appropriate new uses for
|
||
obsolete, deteriorating or underutilized facilities or properties and
|
||
implementing recommended changes.
|
||
|
||
In North Tazewell, the vacant warehouses along Riverside Drive and
|
||
the Norfolk Southern railway line between Tazewell Avenue and Whitley
|
||
Branch Road cou ld potentially be redeve loped/conserved. A
|
||
redevelopment/conservation strategy would include the adaptive use of
|
||
warehouses and other structures of historic value such as the Train Depot
|
||
in order to convert them to economically viable uses. Redevelopment
|
||
actions including acquisition, demolition/clearance would be pursued
|
||
for non-contributing buildings, particularly those in substandard condition.
|
||
Parcels cleared through redevelopment could be reclaimed for various
|
||
uses including, but not limited to, mini-parks and open space, street/
|
||
streetscape improvements, additional parking and infill development.
|
||
Potential infill and adaptive uses could include a business incubator, an
|
||
arts/crafts center, music performance center, museum, education/job
|
||
training facilities, professional offices/retail development and/or multi-
|
||
family housing in upper-floor spaces of the warehouses. (See Concept
|
||
Plan)
|
||
|
||
In the Four-Way Section of Town, vacant supermarkets and retail stores
|
||
in strip shopping centers along Market Street also present the opportunity
|
||
for redevelopment. As an adaptive use, the vacant buildings could be
|
||
developed to complement the recreation facilities of Lincolnshire Park.
|
||
The spaces could be used for indoor sports such as volleyball, basketball
|
||
and racquetball and include a walking track. Other potential uses of
|
||
these buildings could be as an adult day care facility, senior center or
|
||
health/wellness center to meet the needs of the Town’s aging population.
|
||
One potential source of funds for the planning and construction of
|
||
community service facilities is the Virginia Community Development
|
||
Block Grant (CDBG) program.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 66
|
||
|
||
the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) and the Virginia Tobacco
|
||
Indemnification and Community Revitalization Commission (Tobacco
|
||
Commission).
|
||
|
||
Opportunities for the designation of additional historic structures and
|
||
districts on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of
|
||
toric Places should be explored. In particular, an architectural and
|
||
historic survey of structures in North Tazewell in the area of the Train
|
||
Depot and along Railroad Avenue should be initiated. A potential source
|
||
of funding for this survey isthe Virginia Department of Historic
|
||
Resources.
|
||
|
||
REDEVELOPMENT/CONSERVATION AREAS
|
||
|
||
Redevelopment is the process of identifying appropriate new uses for
|
||
obsolete, deteriorating or underutilized facilities or properties and
|
||
implementing recommended changes.
|
||
|
||
In North Tazewell, the vacant warehouses along Riverside Drive and
|
||
the Norfolk Southern railway line between Tazewell Avenue and Whitley
|
||
Branch Road could potentially be redeveloped/conserved. A
|
||
redevelopmenticonservation strategy would include the adaptive use of
|
||
warehouses and other structures of historic value such as the Train Depot
|
||
in order to convert them to economically viable uses. Redevelopment
|
||
actions including acquisition, demolition/clearance would be pursued
|
||
for non-contributing buildings, particularly those in substandard condition.
|
||
Parcels cleared through redevelopment could be reclaimed for various
|
||
uses including, but not limited to, mini-parks and open space, street/
|
||
streetscape improvements, additional parking and infill development,
|
||
Potential infill and adaptive uses could include a business incubator, an
|
||
arts/crafts center, music performance center, museum, education/job
|
||
training facilities, professional offices/retail development and/or multi-
|
||
family housing in upper-floor spaces of the warehouses. (See Concept
|
||
Plan)
|
||
|
||
In the Four-Way Section of Town, vacant supermarkets and retail stores
|
||
in strip shopping centers along Market Street also present the opportunity
|
||
for redevelopment. As an adaptive use, the vacant buildings could be
|
||
developed to complement the recreation facilities of Lincolnshire Park.
|
||
The spaces could be used for indoor sports such as volleyball, basketball
|
||
and racquetball and include a walking track. Other potential uses of
|
||
these buildings could be as an adult day care facility, senior center or
|
||
health/weliness center to meet the needs of the Town's aging population
|
||
One potential source of funds for the planning and construction of
|
||
‘community service facilitiesis the Virginia Community Development
|
||
Block Grant (CDBG) program.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
HISTORIC RAILWA
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 67
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Although economic development is largely a function of private market
|
||
|
||
forces at work in response to demand for specific goods and services,
|
||
the public sector can foster public/private partnerships to direct certain
|
||
|
||
|
||
ortions
|
||
|
||
ADAPTIVE REUSE ** Indoor Recreation / Youth Center
|
||
VAI + Indoor Track
|
||
|
||
+ Technology / Video
|
||
|
||
+ Strip Commercial
|
||
+ Specialty Shops
|
||
Separate Entrances / Signage
|
||
|
||
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
|
||
|
||
Although economic development is largely a function of private market
|
||
forces at work in response to demand for specific goods and services,
|
||
the public sector can foster public/private partnerships to direct certain
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 67
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 68
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
types of development that meet the goals and objectives of the
|
||
community. Through approval of rezoning applications, funding of capital
|
||
improvements for infrastructure and utilities and offering development
|
||
financing incentives, the Town of Tazewell can have an influence on
|
||
the type of development it prefers to have in the community. Specifically,
|
||
a potential source of additional revenue and employment for the Town
|
||
is tourism development.
|
||
|
||
Area attractions such as the Crab Orchard Museum and Pioneer Park,
|
||
Burke’s Garden, Lincolnshire Park, the Historic Downtown and others
|
||
serve to draw visitors to the area. In addition, periodic music festivals
|
||
and performances attract people to the area. Although the Town is
|
||
capturing some of the money spent by visitors, it could receive additional
|
||
revenues if visitors remained in the area longer. Therefore, development
|
||
of a lodging/conference facility at one of the town’s US 19/460
|
||
interchanges could serve to enhance the area’s tourism economy. A
|
||
concept plan for such a facility is presented below.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
types of development that meet the goals and objectives of the
|
||
community. Through approval of rezoning applications, funding of capital
|
||
improvements for infrastructure and utilities and offering development
|
||
financing incentives, the Town of Tazewellcan have an influence on
|
||
the type of development it prefers to have in the community. Specifically,
|
||
potential source of additional revenue and employment for the Town
|
||
is tourism development.
|
||
|
||
Areaattractions such as the Crab Orchard Museum and Pioneer Park,
|
||
Burke's Garden, Lincolnshire Park, the Historic Downtown and others
|
||
serve to draw visitors to the area. In addition, periodic music festivals
|
||
and performances attract people to the area. Although the Town is
|
||
capturing some of the money spent by visitors, it could receive additional
|
||
revenues if visitors remained in the area longer. Therefore, development
|
||
of a lodging/conference facility at one of the town's US 19/460
|
||
interchanges could serveto enhance the area's tourism economy. A
|
||
concept plan for such a facility is presented below.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 69
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
The areas recommended for these types of development are also
|
||
identified on the Community Preservation and Development Map .
|
||
Identification of these areas is to be considered conceptual in nature.
|
||
There are no specific plans to develop these areas at the present time,
|
||
nor there necessarily do any plan within the twenty year time period
|
||
of the Comprehensive Plan. These presentations serve to identify
|
||
economic development opportunities upon which the Town could
|
||
capitalize.
|
||
|
||
HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS The Town of Tazewell has long recognized the importance of establishing
|
||
and maintaining sound neighborhoods to provide for the stability of the
|
||
community. A variety of neighborhoods exist in and around the town
|
||
including both older and newer single-family areas, manufactured home
|
||
parks and several areas of multi-family housing . Many older town
|
||
neighborhoods, particularly those of historic value, continue to be
|
||
preserved and revitalized, even as newer neighborhoods develop and
|
||
thrive around the town’s periphery.
|
||
|
||
Despite these outwardly positive trends, housing-related issues and
|
||
problems are evident in Tazewell, just as they are in other communities
|
||
of Virginia. While most residential neighborhoods in town are well
|
||
maintained, several pockets of substandard housing exist throughout
|
||
the community. Another related issue is the supply of decent, affordable
|
||
housing . Because of the high cost of new housing , a gap often exists
|
||
between what is being built and what many low-income and newly
|
||
formed households can afford. These types of residents have increasingly
|
||
tended to rely on manufactured homes, subsidized apartments or aging
|
||
deteriorated dwellings as a principal source of affordable housing . These
|
||
and other housing and community development factors are discussed
|
||
on the following pages.
|
||
|
||
NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS The following analysis examines the current condition of Tazewell’s
|
||
neighborhoods, and the extent to which these areas may be deteriorating
|
||
or adversely impacted by b l ight . Each of the Tow n’s pr imary
|
||
ne ighborhoods is evaluated in accordance with three general
|
||
classifications: Sound, Transitional and Deteriorating. A description
|
||
of each is found below.
|
||
|
||
The areas recommended for these types of development are also
|
||
identified on the Community Preservation and Development Map
|
||
Identification of these areas is to be considered conceptual in nature.
|
||
There are no specific plans to develop these areas at the present time,
|
||
nor there necessarily do any plan within the twenty year time period
|
||
of the Comprehensive Plan. These presentations serve to identify
|
||
economic development opportunities upon which the Town could
|
||
capitalize.
|
||
|
||
HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
|
||
|
||
The Town of Tazewell has long recognized the importance of establishing
|
||
and maintaining sound neighborhoods to provide for the stability of the
|
||
community. A variety of neighborhoods exist in and around the town
|
||
including both older and newer single-family areas, manufactured home
|
||
parks and several areas of multi-family housing. Many older town
|
||
neighborhoods, particularly those of historic value, continue to be
|
||
preserved and revitalized, evenas newer neighborhoods develop and
|
||
thrive around the town’s periphery.
|
||
|
||
Despite these outwardly positive trends, housing-related issues and
|
||
problems are evidentin Tazewell, justas they are in other communities
|
||
of Virginia. While most residential neighborhoods in town are well
|
||
maintained, several pockets of substandard housing exist throughout
|
||
the community. Another related issue is the supply of decent, affordable
|
||
housing. Because of the high cost of new housing, a gap often exists
|
||
between what is being built and what many low-income and newly
|
||
formed households can afford. These types of residents have increasingly
|
||
tended to relyon manufactured homes, subsidized apartments or aging
|
||
deteriorated dwellings as a principal source of affordable housing. These
|
||
and other housing and community development factors are discussed
|
||
on the following pages.
|
||
|
||
NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
|
||
|
||
The following analysis examines the current condition of Tazewell's
|
||
neighborhoods, and the extent to which these areas may be deteriorating
|
||
or adverselyimpacted by blight. Each of the Town’s primary
|
||
neighborhoodsis evaluated in accordance with three general
|
||
classifications: Sound, Transitional and Deteriorating. A description
|
||
of eachis found below.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 70
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
SOUND NEIGHBORHOODS Sound neighborhoods are those requiring little or no intervention. The
|
||
Town’s proper t y m a in tenance code en fo rcem ent program i s
|
||
recommended for encouraging sound maintenance of homes and
|
||
supporting neighborhood infrastructure. Efforts should be focused on
|
||
maintaining the stability of these neighborhoods and protecting them
|
||
f rom adverse env i ronmenta l in f luences , such a s commerc ia l
|
||
encroachment or excessive through traffic. Sound neighborhoods that
|
||
show initial signs of deterioration are prone to rapid change and it is
|
||
suggested that they be monitored on an ongoing basis.
|
||
|
||
TRANSITIONAL NEIGHBORHOODS The major thrust of the Town’s neighborhood improvement efforts should
|
||
be concentrated in Transitional Neighborhoods where a moderate level
|
||
of public investment will be most likely to succeed.
|
||
|
||
Public infrastructure improvements and low interest rehabilitation loans
|
||
to eligible homeowners can dramatically reverse the deteriorating
|
||
conditions found in these areas. Improvement efforts will have the
|
||
effect of improving the living environment for many residents and
|
||
retaining the sense of community as improvements take place. The
|
||
units in good condition lend stability to an area making it one worthy of
|
||
concerted revi talization efforts. This necessari ly involves some
|
||
wil l ingness of property owners to make investments in housing
|
||
improvements despite the presence of poor housing conditions nearby.
|
||
|
||
Transitional Neighborhoods - A significant number of structures are
|
||
deteriorating and the areas have a moderate level of environmental
|
||
deficiencies, such as improper street layout and setbacks, poor
|
||
drainage, aging utilities, overgrown vegetation and other blighting
|
||
influences. 1 ) Hopkins Street 2 ) Bishop Ave./Broadway Street 3 ) Blacksburg Street 4 ) Valley view Road 5 ) Hill/Maple Street DETERIORATING NEIGHBORHOODS Deteriorating neighborhoods would require substantial amounts of public
|
||
assistance if conditions are to be improved. Clearance of substandard
|
||
|
||
SOUND NEIGHBORHOODS
|
||
|
||
Sound neighborhoods are those requiring little or no intervention. The
|
||
Town's property maintenance code enforcement program is
|
||
recommended for encouraging sound maintenance of homes and
|
||
supporting neighborhood infrastructure. Efforts should be focused on
|
||
maintaining the stability of these neighborhoods and protecting them
|
||
from adverse environmental influences, such as commercial
|
||
encroachment or excessive through traffic. Sound neighborhoods that
|
||
show initial signs of deterioration are prone to rapid change and it is
|
||
suggested that they be monitored on an ongoing basis.
|
||
|
||
TRANSITIONAL NEIGHBORHOODS
|
||
|
||
The major thrust of the Town's neighborhood improvement efforts should
|
||
be concentrated in Transitional Neighborhoods where a moderate level
|
||
of public investment will be mostlikely to succeed.
|
||
|
||
Public infrastructure improvements and low interest rehabilitation loans
|
||
to eligible homeowners can dramatically reverse the deteriorating
|
||
conditions found in these areas. Improvement efforts will have the
|
||
effect of improving the living environment for many residents and
|
||
retaining the sense of community as improvements take place. The
|
||
units in good condition lend stability to an area making it one worthy of
|
||
concerted revitalization efforts. This necessarily involves some
|
||
willingness of property owners to make investments in housing
|
||
improvements despite the presence of poor housing conditions nearby.
|
||
|
||
Transitional Neighborhoods - A significant number of structures are
|
||
deteriorating and the areas have a moderate level of environmental
|
||
deficiencies, such as improper street layout and setbacks, poor
|
||
drainage, aging utilities, overgrown vegetation and other blighting
|
||
influences.
|
||
|
||
1) Hopkins Street
|
||
2) Bishop Ave./Broadway Street
|
||
|
||
3) Blacksburg Street
|
||
4) Valley view Road
|
||
5) Hill/Maple Street
|
||
|
||
DETERIORATING NEIGHBORHOODS
|
||
|
||
Deteriorating neighborhoods would require substantial amounts of public
|
||
assistance if conditions are to be improved. Clearance of substandard
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 70
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 71
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
structures endangering the health and safety of the neighborhood and
|
||
family relocation may be required to correct the situation.
|
||
|
||
Based on the preceding criteria, five (5) of the Town’s residential
|
||
neighborhoods are classified as transitional and one (1) is classified as
|
||
deteriorating . All others are considered essentially sound at this time.
|
||
The six neighborhoods noted for deficiencies are identified below and
|
||
shown in generalized fashion on the Community Preservation and
|
||
Development Map. All classifications apply to the neighborhood at large
|
||
and specific subareas may vary as to overall condition. Pockets of
|
||
deterioration exist in both sound and transitional neighborhoods, as do
|
||
areas of standard, well-maintained housing .
|
||
|
||
Deteriorating Neighborhoods - Most structures are deteriorating
|
||
or dilapidated and the areas have major environmental deficiencies,
|
||
such as drainage and flash flooding problems, overcrowded lots, poor
|
||
access, adjacent incompatible land uses, abandoned structures and
|
||
vehicles, refuse/debris problems and other blighting influences.
|
||
|
||
1 ) Fudge Street These neighborhood classif ications and identif ied boundaries are
|
||
preliminary in nature and should receive further study as resources
|
||
become available. Traditional sources of planning and construction funds
|
||
for neighborhood and housing revitalization include the Small Cities
|
||
Program of Virginia’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
|
||
Program, programs available through USDA’s Department of Rural
|
||
Development (RD), and programs through the Virginia Housing
|
||
Development Authority (VHDA).
|
||
|
||
RECENT NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Tazewell completed a CDBG neighborhood improvement project in the
|
||
Carline area during the late 1980s.
|
||
|
||
structures endangering the health and safety of the neighborhood and
|
||
family relocation may be required to correctthe situation.
|
||
|
||
Basedon the preceding criteria, five (5) of the Town's residential
|
||
neighborhoods are classified as transitional and one (1)is classified as
|
||
deteriorating. All others are considered essentially sound at this time.
|
||
The six neighborhoods noted for deficiencies are identified below and
|
||
shown in generalizedfashion on the Community Preservation and
|
||
Development Map. All classifications apply to the neighborhood at large
|
||
and specific subareas may vary as to overall condition. Pockets of
|
||
deterioration exist in both sound and transitional neighborhoods, asdo
|
||
areas of standard, well-maintained housing.
|
||
|
||
Deteriorating Neighborhoods - Most structures are deteriorating
|
||
or dilapidated and the areas have major environmental deficiencies,
|
||
such as drainage and flash flooding problems, overcrowded lots, poor
|
||
access, adjacent incompatible land uses, abandoned structures and
|
||
vehicles, refuse/debris problems and other blighting influences.
|
||
|
||
1) Fudge Street
|
||
|
||
These neighborhood classifications and identified boundaries are
|
||
preliminary in nature and should receive further study as resources
|
||
become available. Traditional sources of planning and construction funds
|
||
for neighborhood and housing revitalization include the Small Cities
|
||
Program of Virginia's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
|
||
Program, programs available through USDA's Department of Rural
|
||
Development (RD), and programsthrough the Virginia Housing
|
||
Development Authority (VHDA).
|
||
|
||
RECENT NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
|
||
|
||
Tazewell completed a CDBG neighborhood improvement projectin the
|
||
Carline area during the late 1980s.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY
|
||
PRESERVATION
|
||
Page 71
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 72
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TRAILS, GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS PLAN
|
||
|
||
|
||
Although the automobile is the primary means of transportation in Tazewell,
|
||
non-vehicular modes of travel are also quite popular. Walking in particular
|
||
is being enjoyed and rediscovered throughout the community. Especially
|
||
popular in Tazewell are sidewalks along Fincastle Turnpike, Ben Bolt Avenue,
|
||
Riverside Drive, Bulldog Lane and Tazewell Avenue. In some instances,
|
||
local sidewalks serve both transportation and recreational purposes. For
|
||
some individuals, these facilities are a viable means of traveling to work or
|
||
nearby shopping .
|
||
|
||
For many years, Tazewell’s older neighborhoods have been attractive to
|
||
pedestrians, due to their compact nature and charm. The downtown
|
||
district, along the Clinch River in North Tazewell, Tazewell Avenue, and
|
||
around Lincolnshire Park Lake offer more opportunities for walking and
|
||
bicycling than perhaps any other area of the region. Their potential to
|
||
encourage non-motor vehicle trips, however, has not yet been fully realized.
|
||
Also, most newly developed areas of Tazewell were not designed with these
|
||
opportunities in mind. In most cases, walking or bicycling to activity centers
|
||
is difficult due to an absence of sidewalks or trails. Various physical obstacles
|
||
often impose addit ional constraints. With suff icient planning and
|
||
community participation, however, many of these barriers can be overcome.
|
||
|
||
In order to provide a balanced range of transportation choices, it is necessary
|
||
to actively plan for non-vehicular facilities. In the previous section, various
|
||
proposals for pedestrian enhancement were presented, with primary focus
|
||
on the downtown. Presented on the following pages are broader
|
||
opportunities to build upon Tazewell’s existing open space network. In
|
||
addition, a discussion of gateway measures is provided, including an
|
||
assessment of how these principles might best be implemented in Tazewell.
|
||
Many of these recommendations are incorporated into other Plan elements,
|
||
including the transportation and land use proposals.
|
||
|
||
Some precautions should be observed in view of the following discussion.
|
||
All of the proposals outlined in this section are conceptual in nature. To
|
||
be implemented, each element will require further public discussion and
|
||
more detailed engineering analysis. Preferably, this should occur under
|
||
the guidance of one or more citizen advisory groups, with technical support
|
||
by the public works and recreation departments. Funding support for trails
|
||
and pedestrian facilities may be sought from various sources; many of these
|
||
are referenced throughout the Plan.
|
||
|
||
TRAILS, GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS PLAN
|
||
|
||
Although the automobile is the primary means of transportation in Tazewell,
|
||
non-vehicular modes of travel are also quite popular. Walking in particular
|
||
is being enjoyed and rediscovered throughout the community. Especially
|
||
popular in Tazewell are sidewalks along Fincastle Turnpike, Ben Bolt Avenue,
|
||
Riverside Drive, Bulldog Lane and Tazewell Avenue. In some instances,
|
||
local sidewalks serve both transportation and recreational purposes. For
|
||
some individuals, these facilities are a viable means of traveling to work or
|
||
nearby shopping.
|
||
|
||
For many years, Tazewell’s older neighborhoods have been attractive to
|
||
pedestrians, due to their compact nature and charm. The downtown
|
||
district, along the Clinch River in North Tazewell, Tazewell Avenue, and
|
||
around Lincolnshire Park Lake offer more opportunities for walking and
|
||
bicycling than perhaps any other area of the region. Their potential to
|
||
‘encourage non-motor vehicle trips, however, has not yet been fully realized,
|
||
Also, most newly developed areas of Tazewell were not designed with these
|
||
‘opportunities in mind. In most cases, walking or bicycling to activity centers
|
||
is difficult due to an absence of sidewalks or trails. Various physical obstacles
|
||
often impose additional constraints. With sufficient planning and
|
||
‘community participation, however, many of these barriers can be overcome.
|
||
|
||
In order to provide a balanced range of transportation choices, it is necessary
|
||
to actively plan for non-vehicular facilities. In the previous section, various
|
||
proposals for pedestrian enhancement were presented, with primary focus
|
||
‘on the downtown. Presented on the following pages are broader
|
||
‘opportunities to build upon Tazewell’s existing open space network. In
|
||
addition, a discussion of gateway measures is provided, including an
|
||
assessment of how these principles might best be implemented in Tazewell
|
||
Many of these recommendations are incorporated into other Plan elements,
|
||
including the transportation and land use proposals.
|
||
|
||
Some precautions should be observed in view of the following discussion
|
||
Al of the proposals outlined in this section are conceptual in nature. To
|
||
be implemented, each element.ill require further public discussion and
|
||
more detailed engineering analysis. Preferably, this should occur under
|
||
the guidance of one or more citizen advisory groups, with technical support
|
||
by the public works and recreation departments. Funding support for trails
|
||
and pedestrian facilities may be sought from various sources; many of these
|
||
are referenced throughout the Plan.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 73
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
MULTI-USE TRAILS In recent years, the emphasis of most trail systems in Virginia has shifted to
|
||
multi-use design and management. In many instances, bicyclists, walkers,
|
||
joggers, hikers and horseback riders all can be accommodated on the same
|
||
trail or corridor. The key to successful corridor sharing is proper trail
|
||
planning and management. Often, this includes attention to public
|
||
education along with some enforcement. In many areas, local user groups
|
||
patrol the trails to prevent their misuse and promote proper trail conduct.
|
||
Many regional trails throughout Virginia take advantage of unique corridors
|
||
in densely populated areas. Typically, these corridors include stream valleys,
|
||
utility easements or abandoned railroad rights-of-way.
|
||
|
||
In the Tazewell area at the present time, there are no designated multi-use
|
||
trails. In future years, however, if the trails/greenways proposed in this
|
||
section are developed, this should result in expanded opportunities for
|
||
the area’s tourism and recreation-based businesses.
|
||
|
||
Fitness Trails Fitness trails are intended primarily for walking and jogging only. In some
|
||
cases, they include exercise stations along the trail or double as nature
|
||
trails. Fitness trails are usually limited in length and located within existing
|
||
parks as looped or perimeter trails. A trail that loops around the lake at
|
||
Lincolnshire Park, for example, offers the opportunity to be developed as
|
||
this type of trail.
|
||
|
||
The Greenways and Gateways Plan The following improvements are recommended as part of the Tazewell
|
||
Greenways and Gateways Plan, which is illustrated on the Greenways
|
||
and Gateways Map. All trail locations shown are preliminary in nature and
|
||
subject to further evaluation. The objectives of the plan are two-fold:
|
||
|
||
(1) to provide alternative transportation routes to the town’s major activity
|
||
centers through an interconnected system of trails, bikeways and
|
||
greenways; and
|
||
|
||
(2) to provide expanded, close-to-home opportunities for outdoor
|
||
recreation
|
||
|
||
Recommended Trail Improvements The improvements listed below are recommended elements of the Tazewell
|
||
Greenways and Gateways Plan. 1) FITNESS TRAIL - construct a new hiking/fitness loop trail around the lake
|
||
|
||
at Lincolnshire Park. This trail could also serve to tie in to the regional
|
||
Mountain Heritage Loop Birding and Wildlife Trail identified by the Virginia
|
||
Department of Game and Inland Fisheries.
|
||
|
||
MULTI-USE TRAILS
|
||
|
||
In recent years, the emphasis of most trail systems in Virginia has shifted to
|
||
multi-use design and management. In many instances, bicyclists, walkers,
|
||
joggers, hikers and horseback riders all can be accommodated on the same
|
||
trail or corridor. The key to successful corridor sharing is proper trail
|
||
planning and management. Often, this includes attention to public
|
||
education along with some enforcement. In many areas, local user groups
|
||
patrol the trails to prevent their misuse and promote proper trail conduct.
|
||
Many regional trails throughout Virginia take advantage of unique corridors
|
||
in densely populated areas. Typically, these corridors include stream valleys,
|
||
utility easements or abandoned railroad rights-of-way.
|
||
|
||
In the Tazewell area at the present time, there are no designated multi-use
|
||
trails. In future years, however, if the trails/greenways proposed in this
|
||
section are developed, this should result in expanded opportunities for
|
||
the area's tourism and recreation-based businesses.
|
||
|
||
Fitness Trails
|
||
|
||
Fitness trails are intended primarily for walking and jogging only. In some
|
||
cases, they include exercise stations along the trail or double as nature
|
||
trails. Fitness trails are usually limited in length and located within existing
|
||
parksas looped or perimeter trails. A trail that loops around the lake at
|
||
Lincolnshire Park, for example, offers the opportunity to be developedas
|
||
this type of trail
|
||
|
||
‘The Greenways and Gateways Plan
|
||
|
||
The following improvements are recommended as part of the Tazewell
|
||
Greenways and Gateways Plan, which js illustrated on the Greenways
|
||
and Gateways Map. All trail locations shown are preliminary in nature and
|
||
subject to further evaluation. The objectives of the plan are two-fold:
|
||
|
||
(1) to provide alternative transportation routes to the town's major activity
|
||
centers through an interconnected system of trails, bikeways and
|
||
greenways; and
|
||
|
||
(2) to provide expanded, close-to-home opportunities for outdoor
|
||
recreation
|
||
|
||
Recommended Trail improvements
|
||
|
||
The improvements listed below are recommended elements of the Tazewell
|
||
Greenways and Gateways Plan.
|
||
|
||
1) FITNESS TRAIL - construct a new hikingifitness loop trail around the lake
|
||
at Lincolnshire Park. This trail could also serve to tie in to the regional
|
||
Mountain Heritage Loop Birding and Wildlfe Trail identified by the Virginia
|
||
Department of Game and Inland Fisheries,
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 73
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
POTENTIAL GREENWAYS & GATEWAYS
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL. VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
|
||
|
||
Greeting Gateway
|
||
Wayside Trailhead Gateway
|
||
Greenway Connector Challenges
|
||
Class I Greenway Trail
|
||
Class II Greenway Trail
|
||
Central Square
|
||
Existing Rain Gardens
|
||
Planned Storm Water Project
|
||
Gabion Baskets
|
||
|
||
|
||
North
|
||
|
||
POTENTIAL GREENWAYS & GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL. VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
|
||
@ Greeting Gateway
|
||
@ Wayside Trailhead Gateway
|
||
oO Greenway Connector Challenges
|
||
|
||
=== Class | Greenway Trail
|
||
|
||
== Class II Greenway Trail
|
||
|
||
(@) Central Square
|
||
|
||
@ Existing Rain Gardens
|
||
|
||
@ Planned Storm Water Project
|
||
@ Gabion Baskets
|
||
|
||
North
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 74
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
2) CLASS I AND CLASS II GREENWAY TRAILS – construct multi-use trails
|
||
identified on the Greenways and Gateways Map and further described below in
|
||
the Greenways section of the chapter.
|
||
Potential sources of funding include the following
|
||
programs:
|
||
|
||
•Transportation Equity A ct for the 21st Century (TEA-21 Program)
|
||
administered by VDOT,
|
||
|
||
• Virginia Recreational Trails Program administered by the Department
|
||
of Conservation & Recreation (DCR),
|
||
|
||
•Rivers and Trails Assistance Program administered by the National
|
||
Park Service
|
||
|
||
• American Greenways Program funded by the non-profit Conservation
|
||
Fund. As a general rule, local matching funds ranging from twenty to fifty percent
|
||
must be offered as part of a project proposal. The direct involvement of
|
||
local community groups in project planning and fundraising are also
|
||
desirable.
|
||
|
||
Generally, trail and bicycle projects must be included in comprehensive or
|
||
transportation plans for funding consideration under most grant programs.
|
||
The system of bikeways and trails has been designed primarily to support
|
||
the Greenways and Gateways Plan. While beyond the scope of this
|
||
document, it is recommended that a more comprehensive system of
|
||
bikeways be developed for the Tazewell planning area. Ideally, this plan
|
||
should obtain extensive input from the bicycling public and build upon
|
||
the initial improvements prioritized above.
|
||
|
||
The Town may request assistance from the Cumberland Plateau PDC in
|
||
preparing a detailed Bikeway Facilities Plan in coordination with the 2020
|
||
Transportation Plan. Also, VDOT has developed A Virginia Bicycle Facility
|
||
Resource Guide (2002) which offers valuable technical assistance to
|
||
communities. The guide, primarily about paved-surface riding , combined
|
||
with Mountain Bikes on Public Lands (The Bicycling Federation of America)
|
||
can provide a solid framework for meeting a variety of bicycling needs.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS A second major objective of the Greenways and Gateways Plan is to
|
||
establish the area’s first designated greenways. For purposes of this plan,
|
||
greenways are defined as open space corridors that can be managed for
|
||
conservation, recreation and/or alternative transportation. Greenways may
|
||
|
||
2) CLASSI AND CLASS Il GREENWAY TRAILS — construct multi-use trails
|
||
identified on the Greenways and Gateways Map and further described below in
|
||
the Greenways section of the chapter.
|
||
Potential sources of funding include the following
|
||
programs:
|
||
Transportation Equity Act for the 21% Century (TEA-21 Program)
|
||
administered by VDOT,
|
||
|
||
Virginia Recreational Trails Program administered by the Department
|
||
of Conservation & Recreation (DCR),
|
||
|
||
Rivers and Trails Assistance Program administered by the National
|
||
Park Service
|
||
|
||
‘American Greenways Program funded by the non-profit Conservation
|
||
Fund,
|
||
|
||
As a general rule, local matching funds ranging from twenty to fifty percent
|
||
must be offered as part of a project proposal. The direct involvement of
|
||
local community groups in project planning and fundraising are also
|
||
desirable.
|
||
|
||
Generally, trail and bicycle projects must be included in comprehensive or
|
||
transportation plans for funding consideration under most grant programs.
|
||
The system of bikeways and trails has been designed primarily to support
|
||
the Greenways and Gateways Plan. While beyond the scope of this
|
||
document, it is recommended that a more comprehensive system of
|
||
bikeways be developed for the Tazewell planning area. Ideally, this plan
|
||
should obtain extensive input from the bicycling public and build upon
|
||
the initial improvements prioritized above.
|
||
|
||
The Town may request assistance from the Cumberland Plateau PDC in
|
||
preparing a detailed Bikeway Facilities Plan in coordination with the 2020
|
||
Transportation Plan. Also, VDOT has developed A Virginia Bicycle Facility
|
||
Resource Guide (2002) which offers valuable technical assistance to
|
||
‘communities. The guide, primarily about paved-surface riding, combined
|
||
with Mountain Bikes on Public Lands (The Bicycling Federation of America)
|
||
can provide a solid framework for meetinga variety of bicycling needs.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS
|
||
|
||
‘A second major objective of the Greenways and Gateways Plan is to
|
||
establish the area's first designated greenways. For purposes of this plan,
|
||
greenways are defined as open space corridors that can be managed for
|
||
conservation, recreation and/or alternative transportation. Greenways may
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 75
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Trail along the Clinch River in N. Tazewell
|
||
|
||
|
||
be publicly or privately owned and developed through various community
|
||
initiatives.
|
||
Areas that lend themselves to greenway designation are frequently
|
||
considered unsuitable or undesirable for development. These areas
|
||
typically include ridgelines, utility corridors, floodplains, storm water
|
||
drainage ways and stream valleys. In many instances, these lands can
|
||
be made available by protective easements, proffers under zoning or
|
||
by direct donations from property owners. This saves local government
|
||
from using scarce funding on fee simple acquisition. Even where such
|
||
acquisition is necessary, studies have found that real property values
|
||
adjacent to greenways and parks increased in value. This, in turn,
|
||
increases local tax revenue and offsets acquisition costs.
|
||
|
||
Because the Clinch River, one of the most biologically diverse rivers in the
|
||
world, flows through Tazewell, the Town has the responsibility to see to its
|
||
protection and to the protection of its tributaries. In addition to maintaining
|
||
the quality of this natural resource, its designation as a greenway and its
|
||
conservation also provides a degree of protection from the periodic flooding
|
||
that has occurred in the area. To this end, the town should encourage where
|
||
practical on private property and implement where practical on public property
|
||
|
||
Trail along the Clinch River in N. Tazewell
|
||
|
||
be publicly or privately owned and developed through various community
|
||
initiatives.
|
||
|
||
Areas that lend themselves to greenway designation are frequently
|
||
considered unsuitable or undesirable for development. These areas
|
||
typically include ridgelines, utility corridors, floodplains, storm water
|
||
drainage ways and stream valleys. In many instances, these lands can
|
||
be made available by protective easements, proffers under zoning or
|
||
by direct donations from property owners. This saves local government
|
||
from using scarce funding on fee simple acquisition. Even where such
|
||
acquisition is necessary, studies have found that real property values
|
||
adjacent to greenways and parks increased in value. This, in turn,
|
||
increases local tax revenue and offsets acquisition costs
|
||
|
||
Because the Clinch River, one of the most biologically diverse rivers in the
|
||
world, flows through Tazewell, the Town has the responsibility to see to its
|
||
protection and to the protection of its tributaries. In addition to maintaining
|
||
the quality of this natural resource, its designation as a greenway and its
|
||
‘conservation also provides a degree of protection from the periodic flooding
|
||
that has ocourred in the area. To this end, the town should encourage where
|
||
practical on private property and implement where practical on public property
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 76
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
the use of permeable paving, perforated paving blocks, rain gardens and other
|
||
innovative mechanisms to reduce run-off from impervious surfaces. The
|
||
Tazewell Rain Gardens study by Virginia Tech University’s Community Design
|
||
Assistance Center in 2005 and the rain garden demonstration project completed
|
||
at the courthouse indicate one means of providing additional protection to
|
||
the Clinch River.
|
||
|
||
In Tazewell, there are relatively few opportunities for greenways which
|
||
offer potential for future recreational use. Most local streams are narrow
|
||
in width with little vegetative cover. While such corridors can serve
|
||
well as conservation areas, they must also offer some scenic value if
|
||
they are to evolve as viable recreation trails. In more developed areas
|
||
of town, opportunities for greenways are also limited by existing
|
||
structures and multiple land ownership.
|
||
|
||
Accordingly, the Greenways and Gateways Plan designates greenways
|
||
with the best potential for practical use and implementation. Many
|
||
other open space corridors exist throughout town but are better suited
|
||
as natural buffers or for passive type uses. Corridors shown on the
|
||
map have unique assets that give them potential for public use and
|
||
recreation. Each offers scenic value, a desirable destination and feasible
|
||
points of access. Depending on community interest, each could initially
|
||
serve as a backcountry trail and be later developed as a multi-use trail.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAY TRAIL TYPES
|
||
A Class I trail consists of asphalt, concrete, or resin soil cement. It is
|
||
anywhere from 10 to 12 feet wide and has a maximum grade of 5
|
||
percent. Optimum activities for Class I trails include road bicycling ,
|
||
casual bicycling , in-line skating (roller-blading), walking , and running .
|
||
Class I trails are not suitable for horseback riding or mountain biking .
|
||
Potential Class I greenway trail sections are illustrated on the map and
|
||
generally described as follows:
|
||
|
||
|
||
1) Along Fincastle Turnpike from its intersection with Market Street
|
||
|
||
west to Main and Marion Streets in the downtown area
|
||
2) Along the drainage way behind the Courthouse Complex
|
||
|
||
northwest to the County Fairgrounds area
|
||
3) Along the Clinch River from the River Jack area eastward to the
|
||
|
||
Riverside Drive interchange 4) Along Riverside Drive from the Tazewell Industrial Park area
|
||
eastward to the Four-Way section
|
||
|
||
5) From the intersection of Market Street and Fincastle Turnpike
|
||
eastward along Rt. 61 to the Tazewell Community Hospital area
|
||
|
||
|
||
Class I Trail
|
||
|
||
the use of permeable paving, perforated paving blocks, rain gardens and other
|
||
innovative mechanisms to reduce run-off from impervious surfaces. The
|
||
Tazewell Rain Gardens study by Virginia Tech University's Community Design
|
||
Assistance Center in 2005 and the rain garden demonstration project completed
|
||
at the courthouse indicate one means of providing additional protection to
|
||
the Clinch River.
|
||
|
||
In Tazewell, there are relatively few opportunities for greenways which
|
||
offer potential for future recreational use. Mostlocal streams are narrow
|
||
in width with little vegetative cover. While such corridors can serve
|
||
well as conservation areas, they must also offer some scenic value if
|
||
they are to evolve as viable recreation trails. In more developed areas
|
||
of town, opportunities for greenways are also limited by existing
|
||
structures and multiple land ownership.
|
||
|
||
Accordingly, the Greenways and Gateways Plan designates greenways
|
||
with the best potential for practical use and implementation. Many
|
||
other open space corridors exist throughout town but are better suited
|
||
as natural buffers or for passive type uses. Corridors shown on the
|
||
map have unique assets that give them potential for public use and
|
||
recreation. Each offers scenic value, a desirable destination and feasible
|
||
points of access. Depending on community interest, each could initially
|
||
serve as a backcountry trail and be later developed asa multi-use trail.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAY TRAIL TYPES
|
||
|
||
A Class | trail consists of asphalt, concrete, or resin soil cement. It is
|
||
anywhere from 10 to 12 feet wide and has a maximum grade of 5
|
||
percent. Optimum activities for Class | trails include road bicycling,
|
||
casual bicycling, in-line skating (roller-blading), walking, and running.
|
||
Class | trails are not suitable for horseback riding or mountain biking
|
||
Potential Class | greenway trail sections are illustrated on the map and
|
||
generally described as follows:
|
||
|
||
1) Along Fincastle Turnpike from its intersection with Market Street
|
||
west to Main and Marion Streets in the downtown area
|
||
|
||
2) Along the drainage waybehind the Courthouse Complex
|
||
northwestto the County Fairgrounds area
|
||
|
||
3) Along the Clinch River from the River Jack area eastward to the
|
||
Riverside Drive interchange
|
||
|
||
4) Along Riverside Drive from the Tazewell Industrial Park area
|
||
eastward to the Four-Way section
|
||
|
||
5) From the intersection of Market Street and Fincastle Turnpike
|
||
eastward along Rt. 61 to the Tazewell Community Hospital area
|
||
|
||
Giass | Trail
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 77
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
A Class II trail consists of a non-paved surface of stone dust, or well-
|
||
compacted fine-aggregate surface. Its width varies anywhere from 3’
|
||
to 8’ wide and contains grades of up to 12 percent. Optimum activities
|
||
for a Class II trail are casual walking , nature interpretation, running ,
|
||
horseback riding , and hiking . Class II trails are not designed for
|
||
activities such as in-line skating and present some accessibility issues
|
||
for those with physical impairments. Potential Class II greenway trail
|
||
sections are illustrated on the map and generally described as follows:
|
||
|
||
1) Around Lincolnshire Park Lake (Fitness Trail) 2) Along the Clinch River from the Walnut Street area westward
|
||
to the Riverside Drive interchange
|
||
|
||
3) Along the Clinch River near Blacksburg Avenue south to the
|
||
Tazewell Avenue interchange, then along US 19/460 west to
|
||
its intersection with a Class I trail
|
||
|
||
4) From the Clinch River as it adjoins the Tazewell Industrial Park
|
||
south to Maplewood Avenue near Tazewell Elementary, then
|
||
south to Fincastle Turnpike near the Jeffersonville Cemetery,
|
||
and then south and west along the ridgeline to Thompson Street
|
||
|
||
TRAIL SIGNAGE Informational signs should be used along the trail and be consistent with
|
||
adopted design schemes. Interpretive signage offers an educational
|
||
opportunity and should be considered to highlight historical, architectural,
|
||
environmental, and areas of general interest for the Town. TRAIL BENCHES Providing trail users with benches to rest is often critical for their full
|
||
enjoyment of the greenway. It is often possible to place benches where
|
||
there is a view of a special place, thereby providing an enjoyable experience
|
||
and an opportunity to take an activity break.
|
||
Benches should be place clear of the trail’s edge to prevent injury to those
|
||
passing by. Further safety is ensured if benches can be placed off the trail
|
||
in an easily visible place.
|
||
TRAIL SECURITY Security along the trail is very important to the success of a greenway.
|
||
Security items recommended include safety fencing near railroads, lighting ,
|
||
and telephones or call boxes for emergency calls. Fencing near railroads is
|
||
important where trail and railroad lines come close together or where a
|
||
substantial grade separation does not exist.
|
||
Lighting for the greenway is recommended at destination locations only.
|
||
Too much lighting can be expensive and often illuminates natural areas
|
||
|
||
Class I Trail
|
||
|
||
A Class Il trail consists of a non-paved surface of stone dust, or well-
|
||
compacted fine-aggregate surface. Its width varies anywhere from 3°
|
||
to 8' wide and contains grades of up to 12 percent. Optimum activities
|
||
for a Class Il trail are casual walking, nature interpretation, running,
|
||
horsebackriding, and hiking. Class II trails are not designed for
|
||
activities such as in-line skating and presentsome accessibility issues
|
||
for those with physical impairments. Potential Class I! greenway trail
|
||
sections areiillustrated on the map and generally described as follows:
|
||
|
||
1) Around Lincolnshire Park Lake (Fitness Trail)
|
||
|
||
2) Along the Clinch River from the Walnut Streetarea westward
|
||
to the Riverside Drive interchange
|
||
|
||
Class | Trail
|
||
|
||
3) Along the Clinch River near Blacksburg Avenue south to the
|
||
Tazewell Avenue interchange, then along US 19/460 west to
|
||
its intersection with a Class | trail
|
||
|
||
4) From the Clinch River as it adjoins the Tazewell Industrial Park
|
||
south to Maplewood Avenue near Tazewell Elementary, then
|
||
south to Fincastle Turnpike near the Jeffersonville Cemetery,
|
||
and then south and west along the ridgeline to Thompson Street
|
||
|
||
TRAIL SIGNAGE
|
||
|
||
Informational signs should be used along the trail and be consistent with
|
||
adopted design schemes. Interpretive signage offers an educational
|
||
‘opportunity and should be considered to highlight historical, architectural,
|
||
environmental, and areas of general interest for the Town
|
||
|
||
TRAIL BENCHES
|
||
|
||
Providing trail users with benches to restis often critical for their full
|
||
‘enjoyment of the greenway. It is often possible to place benches where
|
||
there is a view of a special place, thereby providing an enjoyable experience
|
||
and an opportunity to take an activity break.
|
||
|
||
Benches should be place clear of the trail’s edge to prevent injury to those
|
||
passing by. Further safety is ensured if benches can be placed off the trail
|
||
in an easily visible place.
|
||
|
||
TRAIL SECURITY
|
||
|
||
Security along the trail is very important to the success of a greenway.
|
||
Security items recommended include safety fencing near railroads, lighting,
|
||
and telephones or call boxes for emergency calls. Fencing near railroads is
|
||
important where trail and railroad lines come close together or where a
|
||
substantial grade separation does not exist.
|
||
|
||
Lighting for the greenway is recommended at destination locations only.
|
||
‘Too much lighting can be expensive and often illuminates natural areas
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 78
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
with too much light. This light can intrude into someone’s home.
|
||
Destination lighting is recommended for trailheads where cars are parked,
|
||
restrooms are provided, or where people may gather.
|
||
|
||
Call boxes are a great comfort for users on trails that are not heavily traveled
|
||
or are located in remote areas that cannot be monitored very easily.
|
||
|
||
Telephones are a bit more expensive than call boxes, and are generally
|
||
located near parking areas and restrooms.
|
||
|
||
TRAIL RESTROOM FACILITIES Once the trail is built and trail usage has increased, restroom facilities may
|
||
be required. Generally speaking , restroom facilities should be located in
|
||
safe, well-lit locations that are accessible by vehicle. Some logical locations
|
||
to consider are trailheads with parking and major access points. Design of
|
||
facilities will vary in technology and style depending on the availability of
|
||
electrici ty , sewer, and water. The architectural character should
|
||
complement the specific context of the site or be consistent with an adopted
|
||
scheme.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAY CHALLENGES There are six areas within the Town where a connection challenge exists
|
||
between two or more sections of greenway. A light yellow circle designates
|
||
these six locations on the Greenways and Gateways Map. These challenges
|
||
consist of railroads, major roadway, and river crossings and locating the
|
||
trail within highly developed areas of town. Upon implementing the
|
||
greenways plan, further study should be done concerning these issues. As
|
||
part of the greenway development process, property owners should be
|
||
involved to understand greenway development and assist in resolving issues
|
||
regarding connections.
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION AND PHASING STRATEGY The greenways network proposed includes approximately 13 miles of
|
||
combined Class I and Class II trails. Implementation could be accomplished
|
||
through phasing the development of the greenways starting with the sections
|
||
that are located on public land or rights-of-way. Using publicly owned
|
||
land first, the Town can get underway quickly and begin to draw additional
|
||
support from residents for the program. ESTIMATED TRAIL COSTS The following costs are construction cost estimates. Final costs will be
|
||
refined as design and engineering studies are done for the greenways
|
||
|
||
with too much light. This light can intrude into someone's home.
|
||
Destination lighting is recommended for trailheads where cars are parked,
|
||
restrooms are provided, or where people may gather.
|
||
|
||
Call boxes are a great comfort for users on trails that are not heavily traveled
|
||
or are located in remote areas that cannot be monitored very easily.
|
||
|
||
Telephones are a bit more expensive than call boxes, and are generally
|
||
located near parking areas and restrooms.
|
||
|
||
TRAIL RESTROOM FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Once the trail is built and trail usage has increased, restroom facilities may
|
||
be required. Generally speaking, restroom facilities should be located in
|
||
safe, well-lit locations that are accessible by vehicle. Some logical locations
|
||
to consider are trailheads with parking and major access points. Design of
|
||
facilities will varyin technology and style depending on the availability of
|
||
electricity, sewer, and water. The architectural character should
|
||
‘complement the specific context of the site or be consistent with an adopted
|
||
scheme.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAY CHALLENGES
|
||
|
||
There are six areas within the Town where a connection challenge exists
|
||
between two or more sections of greenway. A light yellow circle designates
|
||
these six locations on the Greenways and Gateways Map. These challenges
|
||
consist of railroads, major roadway, and river crossings and locating the
|
||
trail within highly developed areas of town. Upon implementing the
|
||
greenways plan, further study should be done concerning these issues. As
|
||
part of the greenway development process, property owners should be
|
||
involved to understand greenway development and assist in resolving issues
|
||
regarding connections.
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION AND PHASING STRATEGY
|
||
|
||
The greenways network proposed includes approximately 13 miles of
|
||
‘combined Class | and Class II trails. Implementation could be accomplished
|
||
through phasing the development of the greenways starting with the sections
|
||
that are located on public land or rights-of-way. Using publicly owned
|
||
land first, the Town can get underway quickly and begin to draw additional
|
||
support from residents for the program.
|
||
|
||
ESTIMATED TRAIL COSTS
|
||
|
||
The following costs are construction cost estimates. Final costs will be
|
||
refined as designand engineering studies are done for the greenways
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 79
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
network. Other factors that could affect costs are ADA accessibility, security,
|
||
and land acquisition.
|
||
|
||
The recommended greenways plan consists of the following:
|
||
Class I Trail
|
||
Land Purchase (Allowance) = $1,000,000 Easement Acquisition (Allowance) = $100,000 41,942 feet (7.9 miles) @ $45.00 per linear foot = $1,887,390 Class II Trail 30,516 feet (5.8 miles) @ $35.00 per linear foot = $1,068,060 Design, legal, and other soft costs (approximately) = $50,000 Total: $4,105,450 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Possible funding opportunities include: Virginia Outdoors fund The Department of Conservation and Recreation administers a grant-in-
|
||
aid program for the acquisition and development for public outdoor
|
||
recreation areas and facilities. Grants are for public bodies only. Towns,
|
||
cities, counties, regional park authorities and state agencies may apply for
|
||
50 percent matching fund assistance from the Virginia Outdoors Fund (VOF).
|
||
These funds are provided through state general fund appropriations, when
|
||
available, and from federal apportionment from the Land and Water
|
||
Conservation Fund (L&WCF) that are available for the acquisition and/or
|
||
development of outdoor recreation areas.
|
||
|
||
Land and Water Conservation Fund Created by Congress in 1964, the Land and Water Conservation Fund
|
||
(LWCF) provides money to federal, state and local governments to purchase
|
||
land, water and wetlands for the benefit of all Americans. Lands and waters
|
||
purchased through the LWCF are used to:
|
||
|
||
●Provide recreational opportunities ●Provide clean water
|
||
●Preserve wildlife habitat
|
||
●Enhance scenic vistas
|
||
●Protect archaeological and historical sites
|
||
|
||
network. Other factors that could affect costs are ADA accessi
|
||
and land acquisition.
|
||
|
||
ty, Security,
|
||
|
||
The recommended greenways plan consists of the following
|
||
|
||
Class | Trail
|
||
|
||
Land Purchase (Allowance) = $1,000,000
|
||
Easement Acquisition (Allowance) = $100,000
|
||
41,942 feet (7.9 miles) @ $45.00 per linear foot = $1,887,390
|
||
Glass Il Trail
|
||
|
||
30,516 feet (5.8 miles) @ $35.00 per linear foot = $1,068,060
|
||
Design, legal, and other softcosts (approximately) = $50,000
|
||
|
||
Total: $4,105,450
|
||
FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
|
||
|
||
Possible funding opportunities include:
|
||
|
||
Virginia Outdoors fund
|
||
|
||
The Department of Conservation and Recreation administers a grant-in-
|
||
aid program for the acquisition and development for public outdoor
|
||
recreation areas and facilities. Grants are for public bodies only. Towns,
|
||
cities, counties, regional park authorities and state agencies may apply for
|
||
50 percent matching fund assistance from the Virginia Outdoors Fund (VOF).
|
||
‘These funds are provided through state general fund appropriations, when
|
||
available, and from federal apportionment from the Land and Water
|
||
Conservation Fund (L&WCF) that are available for the acquisition and/or
|
||
development of outdoor recreation areas,
|
||
|
||
Land and Water Conservation Fund
|
||
|
||
Created by Congress in 1964, the Land and Water Conservation Fund
|
||
(LWCF) provides money to federal, state and local governments to purchase
|
||
land, water and wetlands for the benefit of all Americans. Lands and waters
|
||
purchased through the LWCF are used to:
|
||
|
||
Provide recreational opportunities,
|
||
Provide clean water
|
||
|
||
‘Preserve wildlife habitat
|
||
‘Enhance scenic vistas
|
||
|
||
‘Protect archaeological and historical sites
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 80
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Maintain the pristine nature of wilderness areas Land is bought from landowners at fair-market value (unless the owner
|
||
chooses to offer the land as a donation or at the assessed value or less).
|
||
The Fund receives money mostly from fees paid by companies drilling
|
||
offshore for oil and gas. Other funding sources include the sale of surplus
|
||
federal real estate and taxes on motorboat fuel.
|
||
|
||
Virginia’s Transportation Enhancement Program (TEA-21) The Federal Intermodal Surface and Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
|
||
of 1991 opened a new era in transportation legislation. With this act,
|
||
congress provided the states increased flexibility to manage their
|
||
transportation programs. ISTEA gave all levels of government and the private
|
||
sector the opportunity to work together and plan and develop intermodal
|
||
transportation systems tailored to their specific needs. An intermodal
|
||
transportation system is one on which various forms of transportation are
|
||
integrated and interconnected.
|
||
|
||
In 1998, President Clinton signed into law PL 105-178, the Transportation
|
||
Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) authorizing highway, highway safety
|
||
transit and other surface transportation programs for the next six years.
|
||
TEA-21 builds on the initiatives established by ISTEA. This new Act
|
||
combines the continuation and improvement of current programs with
|
||
new initiatives to meet the challenges of enhancing communities and the
|
||
natural environment as transportation and advancing America’s economic
|
||
growth and competitiveness domestically and internationally through
|
||
efficient and flexible transportation.
|
||
|
||
Funding is available for projects falling under 12 categories as identified by
|
||
federal legislation. These categories are:
|
||
|
||
●Provision of facilities for bicycles and pedestrians
|
||
●Provision of safety and educational activities for pedestrians and
|
||
bicyclists
|
||
●Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic historic sites
|
||
●Scenic or historic highway programs
|
||
●Landscaping and other scenic beautification
|
||
●Historic Preservation
|
||
●Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings,
|
||
structures, or facilities including historic railroad facilities
|
||
●Preservation of abandoned railway corridors including the conversion
|
||
and use thereof for pedestrian and bicycle trails
|
||
●Control and removal of outdoor advertising
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Maintain the pristine nature of wilderness areas
|
||
|
||
Land is bought from landowners at fair-market value (unless the owner
|
||
chooses to offer the land as a donation or at the assessed value or less).
|
||
The Fund receives money mostly from fees paid by companies drilling
|
||
offshore for oil and gas. Other funding sources include the sale of surplus
|
||
federal real estate and taxes on motorboat fuel.
|
||
|
||
Virginia's Transportation Enhancement Program (TEA-21)
|
||
|
||
The Federal Intermodal Surface and Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
|
||
of 1991 opened a new era in transportation legislation. With this act,
|
||
congress provided the states increased flexibility to manage their
|
||
transportation programs. ISTEA gave all levels of government and the private
|
||
sector the opportunity to work together and plan and develop intermodal
|
||
transportation systems tailored to their specificneeds. An intermodal
|
||
transportation system is one on which various forms of transportation are
|
||
integrated and interconnected
|
||
|
||
In 1998, President Clinton signed into law PL 105-178, the Transportation
|
||
Equity Act for the 21* Century (TEA-21) authorizing highway, highway safety
|
||
transit and other surface transportation programs for the next six years.
|
||
TEA-21 builds on the initiatives established by ISTEA. This new Act
|
||
combines the continuation and improvement of current programs with
|
||
new initiatives to meet the challenges of enhancing communities and the
|
||
natural environmentas transportation and advancing America’s economic
|
||
growth and competitiveness domestically and internationally through
|
||
efficient and flexible transportation,
|
||
|
||
Funding is available for projects falling under 12 categories as identified by
|
||
federallegislation. These categories are:
|
||
|
||
‘Provision of facilities for bicycles and pedestrians
|
||
|
||
#Pro
|
||
bicyclists
|
||
|
||
In of safety and educational activities for pedestrians and
|
||
|
||
‘Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic historic sites
|
||
Scenic or historic highway programs
|
||
|
||
‘Landscaping and other scenic beautification
|
||
|
||
shistoric Preservation
|
||
|
||
Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings,
|
||
structures, or facilities including historic railroad facilities
|
||
|
||
Preservation of abandoned railway corridors including the conversion
|
||
and use thereof for pedestrian and bicycle trails
|
||
|
||
Control and removal of outdoor advertising
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 81
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
•Archeological planning and research
|
||
•
|
||
|
||
Environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway
|
||
runoff or reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining
|
||
habitat connectivity
|
||
|
||
|
||
• Establishment of transportation museums
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY GATEWAYS Gateway projects are a relatively new approach to improving visual quality
|
||
and civic identity along a community ’s major entryways. Throughout
|
||
Virginia, gateways are now being recognized as important elements of
|
||
community character. For many, the visual quality of a local entryway
|
||
establishes a lasting image of the community. Gateway improvements help
|
||
define and project the community ’s unique character, counteracting the
|
||
visual clutter and standardized building forms which typify most commercial
|
||
strips.
|
||
|
||
In general, gateway measures have two basic purposes: they provide an
|
||
inviting approach to a community or its neighborhoods and they help signal
|
||
one is about to enter a special place. In most localities, an historic district,
|
||
neighborhood or cultural attraction is the end destination. Also, as provided
|
||
under state law, localities may now establish design standards along entrance
|
||
corridors which lead to their historic districts. In most cases, a special
|
||
overlay district is established to protect the authenticity and visual quality
|
||
of these historic entryways.
|
||
|
||
The physical improvements along gateways may vary depending on the
|
||
setting and design objectives of the community. For example, in the case
|
||
of a more lengthy travel corridor, gateway improvements might include a
|
||
combination of landscaped signs, intermittent plantings, tree-lined edges
|
||
and natural vistas. Urban gateways, such as highway interchange areas,
|
||
might offer more concentrated design treatment, such as underground
|
||
utilities, monument signage, coordinated lighting and other landscape
|
||
features.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s four main interchanges (Market Street, Tazewell Avenue,
|
||
Riverside Drive and Fairground Road) have become the town’s new front
|
||
door. In this era of development, travel service facilities often dominate
|
||
the landscape, changing the way the town is read from the road. While
|
||
these areas must function well as hospitality areas, there is no reason they
|
||
cannot also be attractive gateways through more imaginative streetscapes,
|
||
architecture and site planning .
|
||
|
||
At present, the Tazewell Historic District is not visible from any of these
|
||
four interchanges. Mostly standard highway architecture, such as that
|
||
|
||
® Archeological planning and research
|
||
|
||
Environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway
|
||
runoff or reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining
|
||
habitat connectivity
|
||
|
||
‘Establishment of transportation museums
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Gateway projects are a relatively new approach to improving visual quality
|
||
and civic identity along a community's major entryways. Throughout
|
||
irginia, gateways are now being recognizedas important elements of
|
||
‘community character. For many, the visual quality of a local entryway
|
||
establishes a lasting image of the community. Gateway improvements help
|
||
define and project the community's unique character, counteracting the
|
||
visual clutter and standardized building forms which typify most commercial
|
||
strips.
|
||
|
||
In general, gateway measures have two basic purposes: they provide an
|
||
inviting approach to a community or its neighborhoods and they help signal
|
||
oneis about to entera special place. In most localities, an historic district,
|
||
neighborhood or cultural attraction is the end destination. Also, as provided
|
||
under state law, localities may now establish design standards along entrance
|
||
corridors which lead to their historic districts. In most cases, a special
|
||
overlay district is established to protect the authenticity and visual quality
|
||
of these historic entryways.
|
||
|
||
The physical improvements along gateways may vary depending on the
|
||
setting and design objectives of the community. For example, in the case
|
||
of a more lengthy travel corridor, gateway improvements might include a
|
||
combination of landscaped signs, intermittent plantings, tree-lined edges
|
||
and natural vistas. Urban gateways, suchas highway interchange areas,
|
||
might offer more concentrated design treatment, such as underground
|
||
utilities, monument signage, coordinated lighting and other landscape
|
||
features.
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’'s four main interchanges (Market Street, Tazewell Avenue,
|
||
Riverside Drive and Fairground Road) have become the town's new front
|
||
door. In this era of development, travel service facilities often dominate
|
||
the landscape, changing the way the town is read from the road. While
|
||
these areas must function well as hospitality areas, there is no reason they
|
||
cannot also be attractive gateways through more imaginative streetscapes,
|
||
architecture and site planning
|
||
|
||
At present, the Tazewell Historic District is not visible from any of these
|
||
four interchanges. Mostly standard highway architecture, such as that
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 82
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
typically used by restaurant chains and filling stations, provide no discernible
|
||
hint as to the historic setting beyond. However, the terrain and configuration
|
||
of the interchanges make land within them highly visible, offering many
|
||
opportunities to design around the various foreground, middleground and
|
||
background elements.
|
||
|
||
Under this Plan, the major approaches to the Tazewell Historic District are
|
||
given highest priority. These are identified on the Greenways and Gateways
|
||
Map. Although these particular corridors are emphasized in the Plan, other
|
||
gateways throughout the planning area might also benefit from similar
|
||
improvements. The general guidelines below can help serve this purpose.
|
||
|
||
Gateway Recommendations The following objectives and guidelines should generally apply to Tazewell’s
|
||
gateways:
|
||
|
||
•
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TAZEWELL GATEWAY CONCEPT
|
||
|
||
●Develop gateways that project a clear, positive image of Tazewell
|
||
and reinforce its community identity.
|
||
●Develop gateways that reduce visual clutter and provide order.
|
||
●In areas of foot traffic, develop streetscapes that increase
|
||
pedestrian amenities and safety.
|
||
●Where appropriate and cost feasible, place overhead utility lines
|
||
underground along the major gateways.
|
||
●Encourage signs of monument design rather than pylon or
|
||
monopole designs.
|
||
●Encourage high quality franchise design compatible with community
|
||
character.
|
||
●Develop design standards that clearly define compatible site and
|
||
building elements. Based on vernacular palette, specify building
|
||
material, roof pitch, and color.
|
||
●Encourage developers to incorporate human-scale design principles
|
||
into building facades, streetscape, and site development plans.
|
||
●Increase the amount of landscaping and street trees along the street
|
||
edges.
|
||
|
||
typically used by restaurant chains and filling stations, provide no discernible
|
||
hint as to the historic setting beyond. However, the terrain and configuration
|
||
of the interchanges make land within them highly visible, offering many
|
||
opportunities to design around the various foreground, middleground and
|
||
background elements.
|
||
|
||
Under this Plan, the major approaches to the Tazewell Historic District are
|
||
given highest priority. These are identified on the Greenways and Gateways
|
||
Map. Although these particular corridors are emphasized in the Plan, other
|
||
gateways throughout the planning area might also benefit from similar
|
||
improvements. The general guidelines below can help serve this purpose.
|
||
|
||
Gateway Recommendations
|
||
|
||
The following objectives and guidelines should generally apply to Tazewell’s
|
||
gateways:
|
||
|
||
Develop gateways that project a clear, positive image of Tazewell
|
||
and reinforce its community identity.
|
||
|
||
Develop gateways that reduce visual clutter and provide order.
|
||
|
||
ein areas of foot traffic, develop streetscapes that increase
|
||
pedestrian amenities and safety.
|
||
|
||
‘Where appropriate and cost feasible, place overhead utilty lines
|
||
underground along the major gateways.
|
||
|
||
*Encourage signs of monument design rather than pylon or
|
||
monopole designs.
|
||
|
||
Encourage high quality franchise design compatible with community
|
||
character.
|
||
|
||
Develop design standards that clearly define compatible site and
|
||
building elements. Based on vernacular palette, specify building
|
||
material, roof pitch, and color.
|
||
|
||
Encourage developers to incorporate human-scale design principles
|
||
into building facades, streetscape, and site development plans.
|
||
|
||
Increase the amount of landscaping and street trees along the street
|
||
edges.
|
||
|
||
TAZEWELL GATEWAY CONCEPT
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 82
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Shown at the top of the next page is a gateway concept for the US 19/460
|
||
corridor to create a distinctive gateway into historic Tazewell. As suggested
|
||
by the illustration, numerous trees are proposed to enhance the approaches
|
||
and ramp rights-of-way. Predominantly large trees are envisioned to help
|
||
frame the gateway while preserving visibility for motorists.
|
||
|
||
‘Shown at the top of the next page is a gateway concept for the US 19/460
|
||
corridor to create a distinctive gateway into historic Tazewell. As suggested
|
||
by the illustration, numerous trees are proposed to enhance the approaches
|
||
and ramp rights-of-way. Predominantly large trees are envisioned to help
|
||
frame the gateway while preserving visibility for motorists.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 83
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Specific features of the gateway should be considered conceptual and
|
||
subject to modification. However, these plans may be significantly altered
|
||
by VDOT upon further study. No matter what the final design, the Town
|
||
should seek to make best use of any residue rights-of-way that result from
|
||
this project. In partnership with VDOT, such rights-of-way are often
|
||
“deeded back” to localities for beautification purposes, such as the gateway
|
||
improvements proposed.
|
||
|
||
OTHER MAJOR GATEWAYS Tazewell’s other main approaches to the Historic District involve much
|
||
lengthier gateways via Fincastle Turnpike and Fairground Road. Both are
|
||
somewhat less congested and built up in comparison with the Tazewell
|
||
Avenue Exit. Nevertheless, many of the same design concepts shown can
|
||
be modified and tailored to these equally important gateways.
|
||
|
||
As with the earlier example, VDOT reconstruction plans for each access
|
||
highway and interchange should be reviewed and coordinated with local
|
||
gateway objectives to the extent that is reasonably practicable. Also, the
|
||
assistance of a landscape architectural firm may be helpful during gateway
|
||
design and development, and in resolving technical issues with
|
||
|
||
Specific features of the gateway should be considered conceptual and
|
||
subject to modification. However, these plans maybe significantly altered
|
||
by VDOT upon further study. No matter what the final design, the Town
|
||
should seek to make best use of any residue rights-of-way that result from
|
||
this project. In partnership with VDOT, such rights-of-way are often
|
||
“deeded back” to localities for beautification purposes, such as the gateway
|
||
improvements proposed.
|
||
|
||
OTHER MAJOR GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Tazewell’s other main approaches to the Historic District involve much
|
||
lengthier gateways via Fincastle Turnpike and Fairground Road. Both are
|
||
somewhatless congested and built up in comparison with the Tazewell
|
||
‘Avenue Exit. Nevertheless, many of the same design concepts shown can
|
||
be modified and tailored to these equally important gateways.
|
||
|
||
‘As with the earlier example, VDOT reconstruction plans for each access
|
||
highway and interchange should be reviewed and coordinated with local
|
||
gateway objectives to the extent that is reasonably practicable. Also, the
|
||
assistance of a landscape architectural firm may be helpful during gateway
|
||
design and development, and in resolving technical issues with
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 84
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
transportation planners. In addition, the participation and support of the
|
||
local business community will be an important prerequisite to any large-
|
||
scale gateway or corridor improvement effort.
|
||
|
||
GATEWAY SIGNAGE RECOMMENDATIONS There is evidence to suggest that signage is a critical aspect of a community ’s
|
||
visual landscape. Few elements can detract from community character as
|
||
quickly as billboards, monopoles and sign clutter. For many communities,
|
||
the solution has been to adopt a strict sign ordinance to control sign features
|
||
in a way that reinforces the area’s distinctive qualities.
|
||
|
||
Zoning requirements pertaining to commercial, public and semipublic signs
|
||
should be fully described in the Tazewell Zoning Ordinance. Specific
|
||
provisions for on-premise sign features such as size, height, number,
|
||
placement and illumination should be set forth in the ordinance.
|
||
|
||
In future years, revisions to local sign regulations should be evaluated as
|
||
part of any comprehensive effort to improve Tazewell’s gateways. As a
|
||
general objective, commercial signs and their supports should be small,
|
||
low in height, simple in design and of limited illumination. Through site
|
||
plan review, local officials should encourage signs of monument design
|
||
rather than pylon or monopole designs. Also, commercial signs should
|
||
never be allowed to obscure or dominate traffic signs and public
|
||
informational signs. New systems involving wayfinding signage can help
|
||
clean up sign clutter while demonstrating leadership in design by public
|
||
example.
|
||
|
||
WAYFINDING SIGNAGE New systems for “wayfinding signage” are becoming increasing popular in
|
||
many communities, both large and small. Once viewed primarily as a
|
||
navigational aid, wayfinding programs are now seen as a way to market an
|
||
area’s resources, evoke a sense of local history and improve the streetscape.
|
||
Long commonplace at malls, airports and corporate campuses, wayfinding
|
||
systems often use bold colors and tasteful imagery to attract motorists’
|
||
attention. Unlike conventional VDOT or municipal signage, wayfinding
|
||
systems are often more effective in guiding visitors to public parking and
|
||
local points of interest.
|
||
|
||
Wayfinding programs can be implemented in a number of ways. The more
|
||
elaborate systems can be structured to address the needs of motorists,
|
||
pedestrians and other types of traffic such as tour bus operators. An
|
||
important element of any wayfinding system is that the program is
|
||
expandable and the signs are easy to reproduce. An overriding goal should
|
||
be to convey that there is adequate parking and that historic Tazewell is
|
||
best explored on foot.
|
||
|
||
transportation planners. In addition, the participation and support of the
|
||
local business community will be an important prerequisite to any large-
|
||
scale gateway or corridor improvement effort.
|
||
|
||
GATEWAY SIGNAGE RECOMMENDATIONS
|
||
|
||
There is evidence to suggest that signage is a critical aspect of a community's
|
||
visual landscape. Few elements can detract from community character as
|
||
quickly as billboards, monopoles and sign clutter. For many communities,
|
||
the solution has been to adopta strict sign ordinance to control sign features
|
||
in a way that reinforces the area's distinctive qualities.
|
||
|
||
Zoning requirements pertaining to commercial, public and semipublic signs
|
||
should be fully described in the Tazewell Zoning Ordinance. Specific
|
||
provisions for on-premise sign features such as size, height, number,
|
||
placement and illumination should be set forth in the ordinance.
|
||
|
||
In future years, revisions to local sign regulations should be evaluated as
|
||
part of any comprehensive effort to improve Tazewell’s gateways. As a
|
||
general objective, commercial signs and their supports should be small,
|
||
low in height, simple in design and of limited illumination. Through site
|
||
plan review, local officials should encourage signs of monument design
|
||
rather than pylon or monopole designs. Also, commercial signs should
|
||
never be allowed to obscure or dominate traffic signsand public
|
||
informational signs. New systems involving wayfinding signage can help
|
||
clean up sign clutter while demonstrating leadership in design by public
|
||
example.
|
||
|
||
WAYFINDING SIGNAGE
|
||
|
||
New systems for “wayfinding signage” are becoming increasing popular in
|
||
many communities, both large and small. Once viewed primarily as a
|
||
navigational aid, wayfinding programs are now seen as a way to market an
|
||
area's resources, evoke a sense of local history and improve the streetscape.
|
||
Long commonplace at malls, airports and corporate campuses, wayfinding
|
||
systems often use bold colors and tasteful imagery to attract motorists’
|
||
attention. Unlike conventional VDOT or municipal signage, wayfinding
|
||
systems are often more effective in guiding visitors to public parking and
|
||
local points of interest.
|
||
|
||
Wayfinding programs can be implemented in a number of ways. The more
|
||
elaborate systems can be structured to address the needs of motorists,
|
||
pedestrians and other types of traffic such as tour bus operators. An
|
||
important element of any wayfinding system is that the program is
|
||
expandable and the signs are easy to reproduce. An overriding goal should
|
||
be to convey that there is adequate parking and that historic Tazewell is
|
||
best explored on foot,
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 85
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT
|
||
General Purpose The scenery along US Route
|
||
|
||
19/460 in the To wn of
|
||
Tazewell is one of the regions
|
||
biggest assets, and a significant
|
||
source of local pride and
|
||
economic development.
|
||
|
||
As a means to protect the
|
||
Town’s major gatewa y, a
|
||
Parkway Overlay District is
|
||
being proposed along the corridor to preserve the scenic rural landscape
|
||
of Tazewell and the surrounding area. The Parkway Overlay District will
|
||
attempt to protect the scenic integrity of the 460 corridor as it passes through
|
||
the Town of Tazewell. The District, illustrated in light blue, on the Greenways
|
||
and Gateways Map will enhance the character of the corridor and create
|
||
guidelines to ensure the scenic character is maintained.
|
||
|
||
Benefits of creating a Parkway Overlay District include:
|
||
The Parkway Overlay District (1) provides hillside development standards
|
||
to minimize the impact of man-made structures and grading on views of
|
||
existing landforms, unique geologic features, existing landscape features
|
||
and open space as seen from designated public roads within the town; (2)
|
||
Protects and preserves views of major and minor ridgelines from designated
|
||
public roads; (3) Creates a development review process that maximizes
|
||
administrative, staff level approval of projects which meet administrative
|
||
standards, while also providing a vehicle for review by the Zoning
|
||
Administrator or Planning Commission of those projects that do not meet
|
||
the administrative standards; (4) Minimizes cut and fill, earthmoving ,
|
||
grading operations and other such man-made effects on the natural terrain
|
||
to ensure that finished slopes are compatible with existing land character,
|
||
and; (5) Promotes architecture and designs that are compatible with hillside
|
||
terrain and minimize visual impacts.
|
||
|
||
●Encouraging complementary development.
|
||
●Preserving a gateway experience.
|
||
●Use as a tool to preserve important agricultural land and scenic vistas.
|
||
●Creating a green “infrastructure” and setting up a framework to maintain
|
||
and preserve this community asset.
|
||
●Enhancing the quality of life in the Tazewell region.
|
||
|
||
PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT
|
||
|
||
General Purpose
|
||
|
||
The scenery along US Route
|
||
19/460 in the Town of
|
||
Tazewell is one of the regions
|
||
biggest assets, and a significant
|
||
source of local pride and
|
||
economic development.
|
||
|
||
As a meansto protect the
|
||
Town's major gateway, a
|
||
|
||
Parkway Overlay District is
|
||
|
||
being proposed along the corridor to preserve the scenic rural landscape
|
||
of Tazewell and the surrounding area. The Parkway Overlay District will
|
||
attempt to protect the scenic integrity of the 460 corridor as it passes through
|
||
the Town of Tazewell. The District, illustrated in light blue, on the Greenways
|
||
and Gateways Map will enhance the character of the corridor and create
|
||
guidelines to ensure the scenic character is maintained.
|
||
|
||
Ben
|
||
|
||
of creating a Parkway Overlay District include:
|
||
|
||
‘*Encouraging complementary development.
|
||
‘Preserving a gateway experience.
|
||
|
||
‘*Use as a tool to preserve important agricultural land and scenic vistas.
|
||
|
||
‘Creating a green “infrastructure” and setting up a framework to maintain
|
||
and preserve this community asset.
|
||
|
||
‘*Enhancing the quality of life in the Tazewell region
|
||
|
||
The Parkway Overlay District (1) provides hillside development standards
|
||
to minimize the impact of man-made structures and grading on views of
|
||
existing landforms, unique geologic features, existinglandscape features
|
||
and open space as seen from designated public roads within the town; (2)
|
||
Protects and preserves views of major and minor ridgelines from designated
|
||
public roads; (3) Creates a development review process that maximizes
|
||
administrative, stafflevel approval of projects which meet administrative
|
||
standards, while also providing a vehicle for review by the Zoning
|
||
Administrator or Planning Commission of those projects that do not meet
|
||
the administrative standards; (4) Minimizes cut and fill, earthmoving,
|
||
grading operations and other such man-made effects on the natural terrain
|
||
to ensure that finished slopes are compatible with existing land character,
|
||
and; (5) Promotes architecture and designs that are compatible with hillside
|
||
terrain and minimize visual impacts.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 86
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
VIEW SHED A viewshed consists of three zones. These zones are the foreground
|
||
perspective, middle ground perspective, and background perspective. The
|
||
foreground extends from the viewing location to a distance of ½ mile. The
|
||
middle ground extends from ½ to 4 miles. The background perspective
|
||
extends from 4 miles to the horizon. The areas of primary viewshed are
|
||
shown in the accompanying map.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 4
|
||
|
||
In Tazewell, the foreground (0-.5 mile distance) is characterized by green
|
||
pasture land actively involved in farming with sparsely scattered farm
|
||
buildings and houses. The middle ground (.5-4 mile distance) is
|
||
characterized by rolling hills with the occasional view of urbanized areas
|
||
and buildings in Town. In addition, houses and retail areas can be seen in
|
||
the middle ground. The background (4 miles to the horizon) consists of
|
||
mountain peak and ridge views with some areas of mined land visible.
|
||
|
||
In identifying standards for the district, the following design issues should
|
||
be considered in each of the following viewshed zones.
|
||
|
||
Foreground (0-.5 mile distance): Signs: No commercial advertising signs or billboards are allowed in this
|
||
zone. However, signs identifying property locations and destinations are
|
||
allowed.
|
||
|
||
Fencing: No chain-link fence is allowed in this zone. District guidelines
|
||
will assist landowners in adopting fencing types consistent with existing
|
||
agricultural style fences and construction. Fences should be made of
|
||
traditional materials or natural materials such as hedgerows.
|
||
|
||
Landscape Palette: A landscape palette should be implemented to maintain
|
||
and expand the native plant life within the district and to provide potential
|
||
screening to future development outside the corridor. The suggested plants
|
||
are as follows: Red Oak, White Oak, Red Maple, Red Cedar, Hickory,
|
||
|
||
VIEW SHED
|
||
|
||
‘A viewshed consists of three zones. These zones are the foreground
|
||
perspective, middle ground perspective, and background perspective. The
|
||
foreground extends from the viewing location to a distance of % mile. The
|
||
middle ground extends from % to 4 miles. The background perspective
|
||
extends from 4 miles to the horizon. The areas of primary viewshed are
|
||
‘shownin the accompanying map.
|
||
|
||
000.5 | | 4 Mites to
|
||
Miles io Mller Horizon 1
|
||
|
||
Foreground
|
||
|
||
Midaleground Background
|
||
|
||
Figure 4
|
||
|
||
In Tazewell, the foreground (0-.5 mile distance) is characterized by green
|
||
pasture land actively involved in farming with sparsely scattered farm
|
||
buildings and houses. The middle ground (.5-4 mile distance) is
|
||
characterized by rolling hills with the occasional view of urbanized areas
|
||
and buildings in Town. In addition, houses and retail areas can be seen in
|
||
the middle ground. The background (4 miles to the horizon) consists of
|
||
mountain peak and ridge views with some areas of mined land visible.
|
||
|
||
In identifying standards for the district, the following design issues should
|
||
be considered in each of the following viewshed zones.
|
||
|
||
Foreground (0-.5 mile distance)
|
||
|
||
Signs: No commercial advertising signs or billboards are allowed in this
|
||
zone. However, signs identifying property locations and destin
|
||
allowed.
|
||
|
||
Fencing: No chain-link fence is allowed in this zone. District guidelines
|
||
will assist landowners in adopting fencing types consistent with existing
|
||
agricultural style fences and construction. Fences should be made of
|
||
traditional materials or natural materials such as hedgerows.
|
||
|
||
Landscape Palette: A landscape palette should be implemented to maintain
|
||
and expand the native plant life within the district and to provide potential
|
||
screening to future development outside the corridor. The suggested plants
|
||
are as follows: Red Oak, White Oak, Red Maple, Red Cedar, Hickory,
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
Page 86
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 87
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Sycamore, River Birch, Rhododendron, Ferns, and Mountain Laurel in
|
||
higher elevations.
|
||
|
||
Provide local match for maintenance and preservation of features within
|
||
the district where it has a distinct public interest.
|
||
|
||
Maintain “Barn roof” character of the area: Preserve the rustic roof character
|
||
and architectural features of the buildings and homes throughout the area.
|
||
Create development standards to ensure compliance with local architectural
|
||
character.
|
||
|
||
Middle Ground (.5 mile to 4 miles distance) Provide mechanism to shift density of proposed developments to less-visible
|
||
areas within this zone.
|
||
|
||
Settlements within the valleys: Prevent sprawl between settlement areas
|
||
and encourage development within existing settlement areas.
|
||
|
||
Background (4 miles to horizon) Surrounding Mountains: Restrict cut and fill, earthmoving , grading
|
||
operations, and other such man-made effects on the natural terrain to
|
||
ensure that finished slopes are compatible with existing land character.
|
||
Maintain tree canopy to protect steep slopes and prevent erosion.
|
||
Implement ridgeline protection plan/ordinance along mountain ridges
|
||
surrounding the Town moving power lines, cell towers, etc. out of view.
|
||
|
||
Design Standards It is recommended that the Town establish a set of design standards that
|
||
protects the unique scenic quality of the area. These standards would set
|
||
in place measures that provide preservation of agricultural and forestal
|
||
lands and other lands of significance. In addition, these standards would
|
||
assist in protecting buildings and structures having important scenic, historic,
|
||
architectural or cultural interest. Such districts and standards are authorized
|
||
by state enabling legislation and can be adopted by the Town.
|
||
|
||
Implementation/Next Steps The Parkway Overlay District should be implemented through preparation
|
||
of a local ordinance that designates the district boundary and sets forth
|
||
specific design guidelines to ensure compatible development and viewshed
|
||
protection.
|
||
|
||
A landscape palette should be implemented to maintain and expand the
|
||
native plant life within the district and to provide potential screening to
|
||
future development outside the corridor.
|
||
|
||
Sycamore, River Birch, Rhododendron, Ferns, and Mountain Laurel
|
||
higher elevations.
|
||
|
||
Provide local match for maintenance and preservation of features wit
|
||
the district where it has a distinct public interest.
|
||
|
||
Maintain “Barn roof” character of the area: Preserve the rustic roof character
|
||
and architectural features of the buildings and homes throughout the area.
|
||
|
||
Create development standards to ensure compliance with local architectural
|
||
character.
|
||
|
||
Middle Ground (.5 mile to 4 miles distance)
|
||
|
||
Provide mechanism to shift density of proposed developments to less-visible
|
||
areas within this zone.
|
||
|
||
Settlements within the valleys: Prevent sprawl between settlement areas
|
||
and encourage development within existing settlement areas.
|
||
|
||
Background (4 miles to horizon|
|
||
|
||
Surrounding Mountains: Restrict cut and fill, earthmoving, grading
|
||
operations, and other such man-made effects on the natural terrain to
|
||
ensure that finished slopes are compatible with existing land character.
|
||
Maintain tree canopy to protect steep slopes and prevent erosion.
|
||
Implement ridgeline protection plan/ordinance along mountain ridges
|
||
surrounding the Town moving power lines, cell towers, etc. out of view.
|
||
|
||
sign Standards
|
||
|
||
It is recommended that the Town establish a set of design standards that
|
||
protects the unique scenic quality of the area. These standards would set
|
||
in place measures that provide preservation of agriculturaland forestal
|
||
lands and other lands of significance. In addition, these standards would
|
||
assist in protecting buildings and structures having important scenic, historic,
|
||
architectural or cultural interest. Such districts and standards are authorized
|
||
by state enabling legislation and can be adopted by the Town.
|
||
|
||
Implementation/Next Steps
|
||
|
||
The Parkway Overlay District should be implemented through preparation
|
||
of a local ordinance that designates the district boundary and sets forth
|
||
specific design guidelines to ensure compatible development and viewshed
|
||
protection.
|
||
|
||
A landscape palette should be implemented to maintain and expand the
|
||
native plant life within the district and to provide potential screening to
|
||
future development outside the corridor.
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
Page 88
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUDNING OPPORTUNITIES Several opportunities for funding a Parkway Overlay District program exist.
|
||
Below are grants that could be applied for to obtain funding .
|
||
|
||
Land and Water Conservation Fund Created by Congress in 1964, the Land and Water Conservation Fund
|
||
(LWCF) provides money to federal, state and local governments to purchase
|
||
land, water and wetlands for the benefit of all Americans.
|
||
|
||
Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Program Grants The Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Program is designed to
|
||
encourage projects that promote tree planting , the care of trees, the
|
||
protection and enhancement of urban and community forest ecosystems,
|
||
and education on tree issues in cities, towns, and communities across the
|
||
nation. Grants are awarded through this program to encourage local
|
||
government and citizen involvement in creating and supporting long-term
|
||
sustained urban and community forestry programs at the local level.
|
||
|
||
The USDA Forest Service has allocated funds to Virginia for urban and
|
||
community forestry projects. These funds will be distributed and
|
||
administered by the Virginia Department of Forestry in cooperation with
|
||
the Virginia Urban Forest Council. The maximum funding a single applicant
|
||
can receive is $15,000.00.
|
||
|
||
Virginia’s Transportation Enhancement Program (TEA-21) The Federal Intermodal Surface and Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
|
||
of 1991 opened a new era in transportation legislation. With this act,
|
||
congress provided the states increased flexibility to manage their
|
||
transportation programs. ISTEA gave all levels of government and the private
|
||
sector the opportunity to work together and plan and develop intermodal
|
||
transportation systems tailored to their specific needs. An intermodal
|
||
transportation system is one on which various forms of transportation are
|
||
integrated and interconnected.
|
||
|
||
FUDNING OPPORTUNITIES
|
||
|
||
Several opportunities for funding a Parkway Overlay District program exist.
|
||
Below are grants that could be applied for to obtain funding,
|
||
|
||
Land and Water Conservation Fund
|
||
|
||
Created by Congress in 1964, the Land and Water Conservation Fund
|
||
(LWCF) provides money to federal, state and local governments to purchase
|
||
land, water and wetlands for the benefit of all Americans.
|
||
|
||
Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Program Grants
|
||
|
||
The Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Program is designed to
|
||
encourage projects that promote tree planting, the care of trees, the
|
||
protection and enhancement of urban and community forest ecosystems,
|
||
and education on tree issues in cities, towns, and communities across the
|
||
nation. Grants are awarded through this program to encourage local
|
||
government and citizen involvement in creating and supporting long-term
|
||
sustained urban and community forestry programs at the local level.
|
||
|
||
The USDA Forest Service has allocated funds to Virginia for urban and
|
||
community forestry projects. These funds will be distributed and
|
||
administered by the Virginia Department of Forestry in cooperation with
|
||
the Virginia Urban Forest Council. The maximum funding a single applicant
|
||
can receive is $15,000.00.
|
||
|
||
Virginia's Transportation Enhancement Program (TEA-21)
|
||
|
||
The Federal Intermodal Surface and Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
|
||
of 1991 opened a new era in transportation legislation. With this act,
|
||
congress provided the states increased flexibility to manage their
|
||
transportation programs. ISTEA gave all levels of government and the private
|
||
sector the opportunity to work together and plan and develop intermodal
|
||
transportation systems tailored to their specificneeds. An intermodal
|
||
transportation system is one on which various forms of transportation are
|
||
integrated and interconnected
|
||
|
||
GREENWAYS +|
|
||
|
||
GATEWAYS
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE &
|
||
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE &
|
||
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 89
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN
|
||
The Future Land Use Plan, illustrated on the Future Land Use Map depicts
|
||
the primary land uses envisioned for Tazewell by the year 2025. The map
|
||
is a graphic representation of the many policies and development guidelines
|
||
contained throughout the Plan. Along with the Plan text, the Future Land
|
||
Use Map serves as a general guide for making land use decisions.
|
||
|
||
The overall purpose of the Plan is to encourage an orderly, harmonious
|
||
arrangement of land that will meet the future needs of the Town. Land use
|
||
designations are shown for the land added to the Town through a boundary
|
||
adjustment in 2000 as well as for the Town’s historic corporate limits. The
|
||
map is intended to be specific enough to provide clear direction in guiding
|
||
land use decisions, but general enough to provide flexibility in meeting Plan
|
||
objectives. Except for some existing uses, the map is not intended to depict
|
||
land uses on a parcel-specific basis. Instead, it portrays the general location
|
||
of uses, with entire blocks the smallest areas identified.
|
||
|
||
Components of the Land Use Plan directly influence each other. For this
|
||
reason, they are shown together on the map. In addition, key community
|
||
facilities are indicated generally on the Plan. These facilities are
|
||
interdependent parts of Tazewell and contribute to its overall character.
|
||
Together, these Plan components provide a foundation for addressing the
|
||
future needs, goals, and objectives of the community.
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED LAND USE CATEGORIES The categories recommended by the Plan are organized under four (4) major
|
||
land use types. These include the following:
|
||
|
||
Commercial
|
||
●Downtown/Mixed Use Neighborhood
|
||
●Commercial Community/Regional Commercial
|
||
●Planned Unit Development
|
||
Residential
|
||
●Low-Density
|
||
●Medium-Density
|
||
●High Density
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN
|
||
|
||
The Future Land Use Plan, illustrated on the Future Land Use Map depicts
|
||
the primary land uses envisioned for Tazewell by the year 2025. The map
|
||
is.a graphic representation of the many policies and development guidelines
|
||
contained throughoutthe Plan. Along with the Plan text, the Future Land
|
||
Use Map serves as a general guide for making land use decisions
|
||
|
||
The overall purpose of the Planis to encourage an orderly, harmonious
|
||
arrangement of land that will meet the future needs of the Town. Land use
|
||
designations are shown for the land added to the Town through a boundary
|
||
adjustment in 2000 as well as for the Town's historic corporate limits. The
|
||
map is intended to be specific enough to provide clear direction in guiding
|
||
land use decisions, but general enough to provide flexibility in meeting Plan
|
||
objectives. Except for some existing uses, the map is not intended to depict
|
||
land uses on a parcel-specific basis. Instead, it portrays the general location
|
||
of uses, with entire blocks the smallest areas identified.
|
||
|
||
‘Components of the Land Use Plan directly influence each other. For this
|
||
reason, they are shown together on the map. In addition, key community
|
||
facilities are indicated generallyon the Plan. These facilities are
|
||
interdependent parts of Tazewell and contribute to its overall character.
|
||
Together, these Plan components provide a foundation for addressing the
|
||
future needs, goals, and objectives of the community.
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED LAND USE CATEGORIES
|
||
|
||
The categories recommended by the Plan are organized under four (4) major
|
||
land use types. These include the following:
|
||
|
||
Commercial
|
||
|
||
‘Downtownil
|
||
|
||
ced Use Neighborhood
|
||
‘Commercial Community/Regional Commercial
|
||
‘Planned Unit Development
|
||
|
||
Residential
|
||
|
||
‘Low-Density
|
||
|
||
‘*Medium-Density
|
||
|
||
‘High Density
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 90
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Public / Open Uses
|
||
●Public/Institutional
|
||
●Parks and Recreation
|
||
●Conservation/Open Space Areas
|
||
●Agriculture/Rural Residential
|
||
Industrial
|
||
●Limited Industrial It should be noted that the Future Land Use Plan map is not a zoning map.
|
||
The land use categories shown do not correspond directly to existing zoning
|
||
classifications or to zoning map boundaries. Categories in the Land Use
|
||
Plan are more general indications of what the community envisions for the
|
||
future. Zoning classifications are more detailed and site-specific, and have
|
||
the power of law. However, the Land Use Plan should be used as a guide
|
||
for modifications to the zoning regulations and to bring about the desired
|
||
changes in land use.
|
||
|
||
A description of each land use category follows. The description begins
|
||
with each category to accomplish the Plan and a basic definition for each
|
||
use
|
||
|
||
COMMERCIAL USES Commercial uses in Tazewell strongly shape the town’s character.
|
||
Consequently, they provide a logical starting point for describing the proposals.
|
||
The Future Land Use Plan establishes four (4) types of commercial
|
||
designations for the Tazewell area:
|
||
|
||
I. Downtown/Mixed Use The purpose of this category is to provide for an appropriate and
|
||
dynamic variety of uses in the downtown area for commercial,
|
||
residential, professional, governmental and cultural activities. This
|
||
district is intended to promote an attractive, convenient and relatively
|
||
compact arrangement of uses and buildings with a strong pedestrian
|
||
orientation. Downtown mixed uses generally require small site size
|
||
and strong compatibility with the historic setting and adjacent land
|
||
uses.
|
||
|
||
II. Neighborhood Commercial Areas intended for general commercial development at a neighborhood
|
||
scale, with most uses serving the local population. Preferred uses
|
||
include local retail/service establishments, professional office uses
|
||
|
||
Public / Open Uses
|
||
‘*Public/institutional
|
||
|
||
Parks and Recreation
|
||
‘#Conservation/Open Space Areas
|
||
Agriculture/Rural Residential
|
||
Industrial
|
||
|
||
Limited Industrial
|
||
|
||
It should be noted that the Future Land Use Plan map is not a zoning map.
|
||
The land use categories shown do not correspond directly to existing zoning
|
||
classifications or to zoning map boundaries. Categories in the Land Use
|
||
Plan are more general indications of what the community envisions for the
|
||
future. Zoning classifications are more detailed and site-specific, and have
|
||
the power of law. However, the Land Use Plan should be used as a guide
|
||
for modifications to the zoning regulations and to bring about the desired
|
||
changes in land use.
|
||
|
||
A description of each land use category follows. The description begins
|
||
ith each category to accomplish the Plan and a basic definition for each
|
||
|
||
use
|
||
|
||
COMMERCIAL USES
|
||
|
||
Commercial uses in Tazewell strongly shape the town’s character.
|
||
Consequently, they provide a logical starting point for describing the proposals.
|
||
The Future Land Use Plan establishes four (4) types of commercial
|
||
designations for the Tazewell area:
|
||
|
||
1. Downtown/Mixed Use
|
||
|
||
The purpose of this category is to provide for an appropriate and
|
||
dynamic variety of uses in the downtown area for commercial,
|
||
residential, professional, governmental and cultural activities. This
|
||
district isintended to promote an attractive, convenient and relatively
|
||
compact arrangement of uses and buildings with a strong pedestrian
|
||
orientation. Downtown mixed uses generally require small site size
|
||
and strong compatibility with the historic setting and adjacent land
|
||
uses.
|
||
|
||
I. Neighborhood Commercial
|
||
|
||
‘Areas intended for general commercial development at a neighborhood
|
||
scale, with most uses serving the local population. Preferred uses
|
||
include local retail/service establishments, professional office uses
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL. VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
|
||
jem TON OF TAZEWELL CORPORATE LIMITS
|
||
|
||
[1 ssricunrune puna RestoeNTAL
|
||
|
||
[EE tomoensy nesinen nia
|
||
{Sega 5 evetng us pr 3)
|
||
|
||
[Ey weoum ensiry resioentian
|
||
(Gegl Fay Dyin Towiove oF
|
||
Mameacures Home, 0 ts et 970)
|
||
|
||
[EB tion censiry nesioennat
|
||
Tomrouse, Mul Fam; Condiboareent
|
||
1tsunte pear)
|
||
|
||
[Eo cownroun uo use
|
||
‘Cera Ones etc te Reser
|
||
|
||
‘ses canto maodtorzonaly a vrcaly win
|
||
satera)
|
||
|
||
[TB reccusortoon commercia
|
||
HB cowmunirymesiona, commenciat
|
||
|
||
HB oust
|
||
|
||
[Gy meovemsrmurion.
|
||
[EB wwcnecreanion
|
||
|
||
[Bl conservarion
|
||
|
||
[Bi rorenra reveveroonenr aren
|
||
[Ey mmeco unr oevevomment
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 91
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
and similar business development. Neighborhood service areas require small
|
||
to medium site size, arterial road accessibility and proximity to local
|
||
population centers.
|
||
III. Community/Regional Commercial Includes community/regional-scale commercial development providing major
|
||
retail, hospitality and business/service uses to the Town of Tazewell,
|
||
Tazewell County and the surrounding region. Uses include shopping
|
||
centers, highway-oriented convenience and hospitality uses and U.S.
|
||
19/460 interchange developments. Regional service uses typically require
|
||
medium to large site size, prime location, arterial or major highway
|
||
accessibility, and public water/sewer availability.
|
||
IV. Planned Unit Development In these areas, a variety of residential, commercial, recreational and public
|
||
uses are allowed. Design measures to assure compatibility between
|
||
different uses should be employed; these should include landscaping ,
|
||
access consolidation, building design details, noise and lighting
|
||
management and other methods to promote compatibility with adjoining
|
||
land uses.
|
||
|
||
DESIGNATED AREAS OF COMMERCIAL USE The general extent of areas designated for commercial use is indicated on
|
||
the Land Use Plan. The pattern of commercial development in and around
|
||
Tazewell is well established, with three basic types occurring:
|
||
|
||
A. The historic Downtown Area, including the CBD and adjacent
|
||
mixed-use neighborhoods;
|
||
|
||
B. The older business corridors, principally along Fincastle Turnpike,
|
||
Riverside Drive, Market Street and Tazewell Avenue.
|
||
|
||
C. The US 19/460 interchange service areas. While all these areas are well established, local commercial patterns will
|
||
continue to evolve in future years as Tazewell strengthens its role as a
|
||
community commercial center. The Land Use Plan recognizes the different
|
||
aspects of each commercial setting in and around the town, particularly
|
||
with regard to siting and economic considerations.
|
||
|
||
Of these areas, downtown Tazewell has been the primary focus of the
|
||
community in recent planning efforts. It is discussed first and in greater
|
||
detail relative to other areas, therefore.
|
||
|
||
HISTORIC DOWNTOWN AREA In recent decades, downtown Tazewell has been the focus of concerted
|
||
revitalization efforts. The town’s citizens, leaders and business community
|
||
|
||
and similar business development. Neighborhood service areas require small
|
||
to medium site size, arterial road accessibility and proximity to local
|
||
population centers.
|
||
|
||
I. Community/Regional Commercial
|
||
|
||
Includes community/regional-scale commercial development providing major
|
||
retail, hospitality and business/service uses to the Town of Tazewell,
|
||
Tazewell County and the surrounding region. Uses include shopping
|
||
centers, highway-oriented convenience and hospitality uses and U.S.
|
||
19/460 interchange developments. Regional service uses typically require
|
||
medium to large site size, prime location, arterial or major highway
|
||
accessibility, and public water/sewer availability.
|
||
|
||
IV. Planned Unit Development
|
||
|
||
In these areas, a variety of residential, commercial, recreational and public
|
||
Uses are allowed. Design measures to assure compatibility between
|
||
different uses should be employed; these should include landscaping,
|
||
access consolidation, building design details, noise and lighting
|
||
management and other methods to promote compatibility with adjoining
|
||
landuses.
|
||
|
||
DESIGNATED AREAS OF COMMERCIAL USE
|
||
|
||
The general extentoof areas designated for commercial use is indicated on
|
||
the Land Use Plan. The pattern of commercial development in and around
|
||
Tazewell is well established, with three basic types occurring
|
||
|
||
A. The historic Downtown Area, including the CBD and adjacent
|
||
mixed-use neighborhoods;
|
||
|
||
B. The older business corridors, principally along Fincastle Turnpike,
|
||
Riverside Drive, Market Streetand Tazewell Avenue.
|
||
|
||
C. The US 19/460 interchange service areas.
|
||
|
||
While all these areas are well established, local commercial patterns will
|
||
continue to evolve in future years as Tazewell strengthens its role as a
|
||
‘community commercial center. The Land Use Plan recognizes the different
|
||
aspects of each commercial setting in and around the town, particularly
|
||
with regard to siting and economic considerations
|
||
|
||
Of these areas, downtown Tazewell has been the primary focus of the
|
||
‘community in recent planning efforts. It is discussed first and in greater
|
||
detail relative to other areas, therefore.
|
||
|
||
HISTORIC DOWNTOWN AREA
|
||
|
||
In recent decades, downtown Tazewell has been the focus of concerted
|
||
revitalization efforts. The town's citizens, leaders and business community
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+|
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 91
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 92
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
have achieved many important accomplishments. It has also become apparent
|
||
that downtown Tazewell can best remain vital and competitive with newer
|
||
business areas by capitalizing on its own unique strengths. As profiled
|
||
throughout the Plan, downtown Tazewell offers a distinctive historic setting ,
|
||
a center for local government, and a strong office/professional services
|
||
presence.
|
||
|
||
This character and diverse mix of uses coupled with the expansion of the
|
||
courthouse/county offices have been the driving force behind investment
|
||
in downtown Tazewell. In the final analysis, however, it is not physical
|
||
preservation or any single physical feature that fosters economic vitality.
|
||
The importance of commerce based on human interaction and established
|
||
merchant/customer relationships have played and will continue to play a
|
||
large role in keeping the downtown healthy.
|
||
|
||
In order to reinforce these qual i t ies, the Plan of fers severa l
|
||
recommendations. The overall objective for downtown Tazewell should be
|
||
to encourage a mix of compatible, complementary uses, with less dominance
|
||
by a single land use type. In managing future land use change, a spirit of
|
||
accommodation should generally prevail. Ideally, the downtown environment
|
||
should include more residents living above storefronts and in other suitable
|
||
spaces that become vacant or underutilized. Of greatest potential are
|
||
structures with architectural appeal that can be adapted as affordable
|
||
apartments, studios or live-work spaces. Expanded residential uses in or
|
||
near the business district would help increase around-the-clock activity levels.
|
||
This, in turn, would foster more downtown retailing , cultural and
|
||
entertainment uses.
|
||
|
||
Equally important to the downtown’s economic health should also be
|
||
continued growth of business uses throughout the downtown area. This
|
||
should include compatible, mixed-use growth in areas that were once
|
||
primarily residential. Subareas where the residential market has remained
|
||
soft for an extended period of time, such as along West Main Street westward
|
||
from West Fincastle Turnpike to Fairground Road is an area suited for
|
||
additional mixed-use development.
|
||
|
||
While a more dynamic mix of downtown land uses are desirable, certain
|
||
precautions should be observed. All future building modifications and new
|
||
construction should be compatible with the existing scale, intensity of use
|
||
and architectural character of surrounding development. The Town should
|
||
adopt Design Review Guidelines to provide the principle means for
|
||
safeguarding the character of the Historic District. Many of these guidelines
|
||
address compatibility concerns unique to mixed-use areas, including criteria
|
||
related to parking , screening and other site features. In future years, it is
|
||
important that these guidelines be consistently implemented and supported
|
||
by property owners and the general public. Where applicable, such
|
||
|
||
have achieved many important accomplishments. It has also become apparent
|
||
that downtown Tazewell can best remain vital and competitive with newer
|
||
business areas by capitalizing on its own unique strengths. As profiled
|
||
throughout the Plan, downtown Tazewell offers a distinctive historic setting,
|
||
a center for local government, and a strong office/professional services
|
||
presence.
|
||
|
||
This character and diverse mix of uses coupled with the expansion of the
|
||
courthouse/county offices have been the driving force behind investment
|
||
in downtown Tazewell. In the final analysis, however, it is not physical
|
||
preservation or any single physical feature that fosters economic vitality
|
||
The importance of commerce based on human interaction and established
|
||
merchant/customer relationships have played and will continue to playa
|
||
large role in keeping the downtown healthy.
|
||
|
||
In order to reinforce these qualities, the Plan offers several
|
||
recommendations, The overall objective for downtown Tazewell should be
|
||
to encourage a mix of compatible, complementary uses, with less dominance
|
||
by a single land use type. In managing future land use change, a spirit of
|
||
accommodation should generally prevail. Ideally, the downtown environment
|
||
should include more residents living above storefronts and in other suitable
|
||
spaces that become vacant or underutilized. Of greatest potential are
|
||
structures with architectural appeal that can be adapted as affordable
|
||
apartments, studios or live-work spaces. Expanded residential uses in or
|
||
near the business district would help increase around-the-clock activity levels.
|
||
This, in turn, would foster more downtown retailing, cultural and
|
||
entertainment uses.
|
||
|
||
Equallyimportant to the downtown's economic health should also be
|
||
continued growth of business uses throughout the downtown area. This
|
||
should include compatible, mixed-use growth in areas that were once
|
||
primarily residential. Subareas where the residential market has remained
|
||
soft for an extended period of time, such asalong West Main Street westward
|
||
from West Fincastle Turnpike to Fairground Road is an area suited for
|
||
additional mixed-use development.
|
||
|
||
While a more dynamic mix of downtown land uses are desirable, certain
|
||
precautions should be observed. Alll future building modifications and new
|
||
construction should be comp: the existing scale, intensity of use
|
||
and architectural character of surrounding development. The Town should
|
||
adopt Design Review Guidelines to provide the principle means for
|
||
safeguarding the character of the Historic District. Many of these guidelines
|
||
address compatibility concerns unique to mixed-use areas, including criteria
|
||
related to parking, screening and other site features. In future years, it is
|
||
important that these guidelines be consistently implemented and supported
|
||
by property owners and the general public. Where applicable, such
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 92
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 93
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
guidelines should also be considered informally elsewhere throughout
|
||
downtown.
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED TYPES OF USE In general, appropriate type of business uses to be encouraged in the
|
||
downtown area should include: professional and public offices, downtown
|
||
retail/service uses, home occupations, upper-floor residences and new home-
|
||
based business uses tied to changing markets and technology. Technology
|
||
related uses, in particular, have the potential to play a greater role in the
|
||
downtown economy, given the recent boom in internet commerce. To the
|
||
extent feasible, the local regulatory environment should keep pace with
|
||
these economic changes. Particular flexibility will be needed for home-
|
||
based business uses, which often blur the distinction between “home” and
|
||
“office”.
|
||
|
||
While there should be increased emphasis on technology, existing and
|
||
traditional types of downtown development should also be promoted. These
|
||
sectors include but are not limited to specialty retailing and services, tourism-
|
||
based business uses and general office development. Also, to the greatest
|
||
extent feasible, the downtown area should remain the overall center for
|
||
government offices and semi-public uses so that downtown activity levels
|
||
are assured.
|
||
|
||
As a general rule, street-oriented retail, office and cultural uses are preferred
|
||
along Main Street, where such frontage is particularly important to the
|
||
pedestrian environment. It should also be recognized that the downtown
|
||
area could not reasonably support the high vehicular traffic, high volume
|
||
retail activity now centered along the outlying commercial strips in the Four-
|
||
Way Section of town. Generally, new large-scale commercial development
|
||
should be directed to available sites near the community ’s existing shopping
|
||
centers and commercial corridors. Instead, the downtown area should
|
||
continue to develop its own special economic role, built around Tazewell’s
|
||
unique heritage and character.
|
||
|
||
MAJOR AREAS OF CHANGE Over the next several years, certain subareas of downtown are expected to
|
||
experience more significant land use change. These changes will result
|
||
from new development initiatives and opportunities presented by vacant
|
||
buildings and land. At present, most areas of downtown Tazewell are stable
|
||
or thriving . Opportunities for physical change and renewal are confined
|
||
primarily to the western section of downtown, generally along W. Main
|
||
Street.
|
||
|
||
guidelines should also be considered informally elsewhere throughout
|
||
downtown,
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED TYPES OF USE
|
||
|
||
In general, appropriate type of business uses to be encouraged in the
|
||
downtown area should include: professional and public offices, downtown
|
||
retailiservice uses, home occupations, upper-floor residences and new home-
|
||
based business uses tied to changing markets and technology. Technology
|
||
related uses, in particular, have the potential to play a greater role in the
|
||
downtown economy, given the recent boom in internet commerce. To the
|
||
extent feasible, the local regulatory environment should keep pace with
|
||
these economic changes. Particular flexibility will be needed for home-
|
||
based business uses, which often blur the distinction between "home" and
|
||
“office”.
|
||
|
||
While there should be increased emphasis on technology, existing and
|
||
traditional types of downtown development should also be promoted. These
|
||
sectors include but are not limited to specially retailing and services, tourism-
|
||
based business uses and general office development. Also, to the greatest
|
||
extent feasible, the downtown area should remain the overall center for
|
||
government offices and semi-public_uses so that downtown activity levels
|
||
are assured
|
||
|
||
Asa general rule, street-oriented retail, office and cultural uses are preferred
|
||
along Main Street, where such frontage is particularly important to the
|
||
pedestrian environment. It should also be recognized that the downtown
|
||
area could not reasonably support the high vehicular traffic, high volume
|
||
retail activity now centered along the outlying commercial strips in the Four-
|
||
Way Section of town. Generally, new large-scale commercial development
|
||
should be directed to available sites near the community's existing shopping
|
||
centers and commercial corridors. Instead, the downtown area should
|
||
continue to develop its own special economic role, built around Tazewell’s
|
||
unique heritage and character.
|
||
|
||
MAJOR AREAS OF CHANGE
|
||
|
||
Over the next several years, certain subareas of downtown are expected to
|
||
experience more significant land use change. These changes will result
|
||
from new development initiatives and opportunities presented by vacant
|
||
buildings and land. At present, most areas of downtown Tazewell are stable
|
||
or thriving. Opportunities for physical change and renewal are confined
|
||
primarily to the western section of downtown, generally along W. Main
|
||
Street.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+|
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 93
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 94
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
There are also opportunities for positive change and renewal in other sections
|
||
of downtown. Although vacancy rates have traditionally remained low in
|
||
the central business district (CBD), considerable opportunities exist to
|
||
strengthen the mix, depth and dynamics of uses in this area. In general, it
|
||
should be a goal to develop a lively tourist district in and around the CBD,
|
||
with a greater number of uses open in the early evening hours. This would
|
||
help to expand customer traffic and the net reach of the downtown market
|
||
area.
|
||
|
||
A related objective should be to extend downtown visitation beyond the
|
||
one or two day period commonly reported by area merchants. More year-
|
||
round activity is needed to support downtown retailing . Adding more
|
||
amenities to the area, both public and private, will give visitors a reason to
|
||
linger and explore more of the downtown area. In the years ahead, important
|
||
subareas such as the Historic Courthouse and the Old County Administration
|
||
Building should be focal points for renewed community action and attention.
|
||
If properly promoted and enhanced these areas are potential catalysts for
|
||
further downtown renewal.
|
||
|
||
REGULATORY /MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS While a broader, mixed-use orientation is recommended for downtown
|
||
Tazewell, this does not imply a need for major zoning revisions. Based on
|
||
a joint review of local ordinances, there is no significant need to modify or
|
||
reorganize the two zoning classifications (R-1, B-2,) which currently regulate
|
||
land use within the larger downtown area. Both the historic integrity and
|
||
mixed-use character of downtown Tazewell are being effectively managed
|
||
and promoted under existing regulations and guidelines. The primary revision
|
||
recommended is the formal adoption of a historic preservation overlay district
|
||
(HPD) to provide additional protection against demolition or alteration of
|
||
historic structures in the district.
|
||
|
||
Beyond regulation, there is a need for improved downtown organization
|
||
and capacity building, as might be accomplished under a “Main Street”
|
||
program. While downtown Tazewell is by and large economically healthy,
|
||
there remains a need for greater involvement by the downtown business
|
||
community in the planning and direction of future development. At present,
|
||
several organizations promote Tazewell at large, but only one informal group
|
||
represents the downtown retail district.
|
||
|
||
The Virginia “Main Street” program is a practical, action-oriented way for
|
||
communities to promote downtown growth within a historic preservation
|
||
context. Such an umbrella-type organization would also help the private
|
||
sector, the Town, and its various interest groups better focus their energy
|
||
and resources in a common direction.
|
||
|
||
There are also opportunities for positive change and renewal in other sections
|
||
of downtown. Although vacancy rates have traditionally remained low in
|
||
the central business district (CBD), considerable opportunities exist to
|
||
strengthen the mix, depth and dynamics of uses in this area. In general, it
|
||
should be a goal to develop a lively tourist district in and around the CBD,
|
||
with a greater number of uses open in the early evening hours. This would
|
||
help to expand customer traffic and the net reach of the downtown market
|
||
area.
|
||
|
||
A related objective should be to extend downtown visitation beyond the
|
||
‘one or two day period commonly reported by area merchants. More year-
|
||
round activity is needed to support downtown retailing. Adding more
|
||
amenities to the area, both public and private, will give visitors a reason to
|
||
linger and explore more of the downtown area. In the years ahead, important
|
||
subareas such as the Historic Courthouse and the Old County Administration
|
||
Building should be focal points for renewed community action and attention
|
||
If properly promoted and enhanced these areas are potential catalysts for
|
||
further downtown renewal.
|
||
|
||
REGULATORY /MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
|
||
|
||
While a broader, mixed-use orientation is recommended for downtown
|
||
Tazewell, this does not imply a need for major zoning revisions. Based on
|
||
ajoint review of local ordinances, there is no significant need to modify or
|
||
reorganize the two zoning classifications (R-1, B-2,) which currently regulate
|
||
land use within the larger downtown area. Both the historic integrity and
|
||
mixed-use character of downtown Tazewell are being effectively managed
|
||
and promoted under existing regulations and guidelines. The primary revision
|
||
recommended is the formal adoption of a historic preservation overlay district
|
||
(HPD) to provide additional protection against demolition or alteration of
|
||
historic structures in the district.
|
||
|
||
Beyond regulation, there is a need for improved downtown organization
|
||
and capacity building, as might be accomplished under a “Main Street”
|
||
program. While downtown Tazewell is by and large economically healthy,
|
||
there remains a need for greater involvement by the downtown business
|
||
‘community in the planning and direction of future development. At present,
|
||
several organizations promote Tazewell at large, but only one informal group
|
||
represents the downtown retail district
|
||
|
||
The Virginia “Main Street” program is a practical, action-oriented way for
|
||
‘communities to promote downtown growth within a historic preservation
|
||
context. Such an umbrella-type organization would also help the private
|
||
sector, the Town, and its various interest groups better focus their energy
|
||
and resources in acommon direction,
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 94
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 95
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Beginning in the year 2000, new Main Street communities will be designated
|
||
following a competitive application process. For the first time, affiliate
|
||
programs have been offered for localities that do not wish to support a full-
|
||
time director. Interest and financial support from both the public and private
|
||
sector are needed to establish a viable Main Street Program. Such an initiative
|
||
should not be pursued if this support proves lacking . In place of a formal
|
||
program, a Main Street Four Point Approach process could also be followed
|
||
based on local priorities. Hiring a part-time Main Street manager also would
|
||
be beneficial in assisting with downtown business retention and recruitment
|
||
efforts.
|
||
OLDER BUSINESS CORRIDORS Older business corridors in Tazewell generally extend along Fincastle
|
||
Turnpike, Riverside Drive, Tazewell Avenue and Market Street and include
|
||
some of the area’s first shopping centers. In general, these corridors have
|
||
remained in good economic health over the years. However, there have
|
||
been closings of two supermarkets in strip shopping centers along Market
|
||
Street in the Four-Way Section of town that have created problems due to
|
||
their continued vacancy.
|
||
|
||
As indicated by the map, Fincastle Turnpike, Ben Bolt Avenue and W.
|
||
Riverside Drive are designated for Neighborhood Commercial development,
|
||
consistent with its present use and character. A distinction offered by the
|
||
Plan is that this area retains a community focus, with most uses oriented
|
||
toward serving the local population. In terms of physical form, this area
|
||
should be appropriately scaled and compatible with the established
|
||
neighborhoods, which often closely adjoin them.
|
||
|
||
At present, there is little discernible difference between the town’s older
|
||
business corridors and the interchange areas. Both are highway-oriented
|
||
and support a mix of popular franchises, national chains and independent
|
||
establishments. However, it is an objective of the Plan to begin treating
|
||
these areas separately, as future market conditions will impact each area
|
||
differently. For example, portions of the older business corridors are likely
|
||
to undergo further transition as the planning area continues to suburbanize.
|
||
The interchange areas, on the other hand, are likely to capture an increasingly
|
||
large share of areawide investment in future years.
|
||
|
||
Because of this changing economic picture, continued transition along the
|
||
older corridors should be anticipated and planned for. While redevelopment
|
||
here is desirable, business owners in these areas, like those in the downtown
|
||
district, must continue to adapt and identify new market approaches. In
|
||
the near term, this could include a continued emphasis on serving
|
||
convenience needs of adjoining neighborhoods and through traffic, while
|
||
also exploring new business opportunities and venues. This might include
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Historic Main Street
|
||
|
||
Beginning in the year 2000, new Main Street communities will be designated
|
||
following a competitive application process. For the first time, affiliate
|
||
programs have been offered for localities that do not wish to support a full-
|
||
time director. Interest and financial support from both the public and private
|
||
sector are needed to establish a viable Main Street Program. Such an initiative
|
||
should not be pursued if this support proves lacking. In place of a formal
|
||
program, a Main Street Four Point Approach process could also be followed
|
||
based on local priorities. Hiring a part-time Main Street manager also would
|
||
be beneficial in assisting with downtown business retention and recruitment
|
||
efforts.
|
||
|
||
Historic Main Street
|
||
|
||
OLDER BUSINESS CORRIDORS
|
||
|
||
Older business corridors in Tazewell generally extend along Fincastle
|
||
Turnpike, Riverside Drive, Tazewell Avenue and Market Street and include
|
||
some of the area's first shopping centers. In general, these corridors have
|
||
remained in good economic health over the years. However, there have
|
||
been closings of two supermarkets in strip shopping centers along Market
|
||
Street in the Four-Way Section of town that have created problems due to
|
||
their continued vacancy.
|
||
|
||
As indicated by the map, Fincastle Tumpike, Ben Bolt Avenue and W.
|
||
Riverside Drive are designated for Neighborhood Commercial development,
|
||
consistent with its present use and character. A distinction offered by the
|
||
Plan is that this area retains a community focus, with most uses oriented
|
||
toward serving the local population. In terms of physical form, this area
|
||
should be appropriately scaled and compatible with the established
|
||
neighborhoods, which often closely adjoin them
|
||
|
||
At present, theres little discernible difference between the town's older
|
||
business corridors and the interchange areas. Both are highway-oriented
|
||
and support a mix of popular franchises, national chains and independent
|
||
establishments. However, it is an objective of the Planto begin treating
|
||
these areas separately, as future market conditions will impact each area
|
||
differently. For example, portions of the older business corridors are likely
|
||
to undergo further transition as the planning area continues to suburbanize.
|
||
The interchange areas, on the other hand, are likely to capture an increasingly
|
||
large share of areawide investment in future years.
|
||
|
||
Because of this changing economic picture, continued transition along the
|
||
older corridors should be anticipated and planned for. While redevelopment
|
||
here is desirable, business owners in these areas, like those in the downtown
|
||
district, must continue to adapt and identify new market approaches. In
|
||
the near term, this could include a continued emphasis on serving
|
||
convenience needs of adjoining neighborhoods and through traffic, while
|
||
also exploring new business opportunities and venues. This mightinclude
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 96
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
modified or expanded lines of retailing , a different emphasis in service
|
||
orientation, or various other approaches tied to changing market conditions.
|
||
In order to facilitate an orderly transition along the older corridors, the
|
||
following land use approaches are recommended:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL SERVICE/HOSPITALITY AREAS With their strategic location along US 19/460, the interchange areas serve
|
||
as the front door to Tazewell’s potential travel industry. In recent years,
|
||
fast-food restaurants have clustered near two of the town’s four interchanges
|
||
(Riverside Drive and Tazewell Avenue). Since Tazewell functions as a
|
||
transportation node, these areas service a wide range of users. On any
|
||
given day, this includes regional through travelers, motor freight carriers,
|
||
local residents and tourists visiting the Crab Orchard Museum and Pioneer
|
||
Park, Burke’s Garden and the Pocahontas Exhibition Coal Mine. As a result,
|
||
the interchange areas have the potential to attract the larger retailers and
|
||
service uses, which cater to this broad and increasingly mobile population.
|
||
In addition to regional shopping , the development of lodging/meeting
|
||
facilities may help to anchor the travel service areas, as reflected on the
|
||
Plan.
|
||
|
||
Intermixed and extending out from the interchanges is considerable low-
|
||
density development. These corridors are primarily comprised of general
|
||
commercial and residential uses. Together, the highway corridors and the
|
||
interchange areas that serve them are expected to be the major commercial
|
||
growth centers for Tazewell in future years. The primary challenge for
|
||
these areas will be to accommodate future growth without compromising
|
||
their ability to function as efficient, attractive gateways for the town.
|
||
|
||
Even under the best of circumstances, the town’s interchange areas are
|
||
likely to experience some level of congestion and traffic-related problems
|
||
for the future. The overall aim for these areas should be to accommodate
|
||
local and widely fluctuating tourist travel demands with a reasonable level
|
||
of operating efficiency. For the present time, efforts should primarily be
|
||
|
||
●A greater degree of infill/office development should be encouraged along
|
||
each corridor.
|
||
●Remaining residences, particularly those which directly front the
|
||
roadway, should be targeted for redevelopment or conversion to
|
||
commercial use.
|
||
●Other desirable kinds of land use include combination uses and specialty
|
||
retail/service development suited to an urban thoroughfare.
|
||
●Gateway improvements would contribute to a more stable economic
|
||
environment, and should be pursued jointly by the Town and corridor area
|
||
business owners.
|
||
|
||
modified or expanded lines of retailing, a different emphasis in service
|
||
orientation, or various other approaches tied to changing market conditions.
|
||
In order to facilitate an orderly transition along the older corridors, the
|
||
following land use approaches are recommended:
|
||
|
||
‘*A greater degree of infil/office development should be encouraged along
|
||
each corridor.
|
||
|
||
‘Remaining residences, particularly those which directly front the
|
||
roadway, should be targeted for redevelopment or conversion to
|
||
‘commercial use.
|
||
|
||
‘*Other desirable kinds of land use include combination uses and specialty
|
||
retail/service development suited to an urban thoroughfare.
|
||
|
||
‘*Gateway improvements would contribute to a more stable economic
|
||
environment, and should be pursued jointly by the Town and corridor area
|
||
business owners.
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL SERVICE/HOSPITALITY AREAS
|
||
|
||
With their strategic location along US 19/460, the interchange areas serve
|
||
as the front door to Tazewell’s potential travel industry. In recent years,
|
||
fast-food restaurants have clustered near two of the town's four interchanges
|
||
(Riverside Drive and Tazewell Avenue). Since Tazewell functions as a
|
||
transportation node, these areas service a wide range of users. On any
|
||
given day, this includes regional through travelers, motor freight carriers,
|
||
local residents and tourists visiting the Crab Orchard Museum and Pioneer
|
||
Park, Burke's Garden and the Pocahontas Exhibition Coal Mine. As a result,
|
||
the interchange areas have the potential to attract the larger retailers and
|
||
service uses, which cater to this broad and increasingly mobile population.
|
||
In addition to regional shopping, the development of lodging/meeting
|
||
facilities may help to anchor the travel service areas, as reflected on the
|
||
Plan.
|
||
|
||
Intermixed and extending out from the interchanges is considerable low-
|
||
density development. These corridors are primarily comprised of general
|
||
‘commercial and residential uses. Together, the highway corridors and the
|
||
interchange areas that serve them are expected to be the major commercial
|
||
growth centers for Tazewellin future years. The primary challenge for
|
||
these areas will be to accommodate future growth without compromising
|
||
their ability to function as efficient, attractive gateways for the town.
|
||
|
||
Even under the best of circumstances, the town's interchange areas are
|
||
likely to experience some level of congestion and traffic-related problems
|
||
for the future. The overall aim for these areas should be to accommodate
|
||
local and widely fluctuating tourist travel demands with a reasonable level
|
||
of operating efficiency. For the present time, efforts should primarily be
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 96
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 97
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
directed toward implementing the gateway and urban design principles
|
||
presented in the Plan. These will help resolve many of the physical and
|
||
aesthetic problems at the interchange areas.
|
||
|
||
Consistent with their present use and character, the Plan designates the
|
||
interchange service areas for general commercial development at a regional
|
||
scale. Sites in these areas are sufficiently sized and separated from existing
|
||
neighborhoods to accommodate regional types of uses, which often involve
|
||
larger structures, extensive parking and heavy traffic flow. As evident from
|
||
the map, the Plan seeks to concentrate commercial growth within or
|
||
adjacent to existing commercial centers at each interchange. Even where
|
||
extensive highway frontage is available, commercial growth should be
|
||
compact and concentrated. Conversely, if commercial uses are allowed to
|
||
scatter or extensively build along the highway, the result can be increased
|
||
service and utility costs, increased traffic congestion and undesirable sprawl
|
||
in sensitive environmental areas.
|
||
While linear forms of development along the local highways are already
|
||
well established, the Town should consider a number of steps to reduce
|
||
the potential for further sprawl. First, Tazewell officials should work closely
|
||
with county planning staff to encourage compact, high quality development
|
||
along major entranceways leading into the region. This cooperative effort
|
||
may best be affected through joint site plan review or another similar
|
||
arrangement. Secondly, strategies to concentrate strip development should
|
||
be pursued, such as focusing growth at major intersections, promoting higher
|
||
densities near lodging and restaurant facilities, and providing commercial
|
||
opportunities along internal roadways. Certain design and land use provisions
|
||
associated with planned unit developments could also seek to encourage
|
||
limited curb cuts, shared parking and entranceways, and other measures
|
||
aimed at promoting consolidated land use development. These provisions
|
||
could contribute measurably to quality development at or near the local
|
||
interchanges. INSTITUTIONAL/OFFICE USES Major institutional uses in Tazewell form an additional category of commercial
|
||
development. These uses are considered apart from the many smaller
|
||
government, civic and religious uses that are distributed throughout town.
|
||
As shown on the Plan map, major institutional uses include a complex for
|
||
public schools, a community hospital, county administrative offices, water
|
||
and wastewater treatment plants and the County Fairgrounds. All of these
|
||
areas are self-contained although supporting professional office uses adjoin
|
||
the Tazewell Community Hospital and the Courthouse Complex.
|
||
|
||
For years, the buildings, grounds and activities related to these institutions
|
||
have been essential elements of Tazewell. Together, they function as major
|
||
employment centers for the town in addition to the community services
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Ave. Interchange
|
||
|
||
directed toward implementing the gateway and urban design principles
|
||
presented in the Plan. These will help resolve many of the physical and
|
||
aesthetic problems at the interchange areas.
|
||
|
||
Consistent with their present use and character, the Plan designates the
|
||
interchange service areas for general commercial development at a regional
|
||
scale. Sites in these areas are sufficiently sized and separated from existing
|
||
neighborhoods to accommodate regional types of uses, which often involve
|
||
larger structures, extensive parking and heavy traffic flow. As evident from
|
||
the map, the Plan seeks to concentrate commercial growth within or
|
||
adjacent to existing commercial centers at each interchange. Even where
|
||
extensive highway frontage is available, commercial growth should be
|
||
‘compact and concentrated. Conversely, if commercial uses are allowed to
|
||
scatter or extensively build along the highway, the result can be increased
|
||
service and utility costs, increased traffic congestion and undesirable spraw!
|
||
in sensitive environmental areas.
|
||
|
||
While linear forms of development along the local highways are already
|
||
well established, the Town should consider a number of steps to reduce
|
||
the potential for further sprawl. First, Tazewell officials should work closely
|
||
with county planning staffto encourage compact, high quality development
|
||
along major entranceways leading into the region. This cooperative effort
|
||
may best be affected through joint site plan review or another similar
|
||
arrangement. Secondly, strategies to concentrate strip development should
|
||
be pursued, such as focusing growth at major intersections, promoting higher
|
||
densities nearlodging and restaurant facilities, and providing commercial
|
||
‘opportunities along internal roadways. Certain design and land use provisions
|
||
associated with planned unit developments could also seek to encourage
|
||
limited curb cuts, shared parking and entranceways, and other measures
|
||
aimed at promoting consolidated land use development. These provisions
|
||
could contribute measurably to quality development at or near the local
|
||
interchanges.
|
||
|
||
INSTITUTIONAL/OFFICE USES
|
||
|
||
Major institutional uses in Tazewell form an additional category of commercial
|
||
development. These uses are considered apart from the many smaller
|
||
government, civic and religious uses that are distributed throughout town.
|
||
‘As shown on the Plan map, major institutional uses include a complex for
|
||
public schools, a community hospital, county administrative offices, water
|
||
and wastewater treatment plants and the County Fairgrounds. All of these
|
||
areas are self-contained although supporting professional office uses adjoin
|
||
the Tazewell Community Hospital and the Courthouse Complex.
|
||
|
||
For years, the buildings, grounds and activities related to these institutions
|
||
have been essential elements of Tazewell. Together, they function as major
|
||
‘employment centers for the town in addition to the community services
|
||
|
||
Tazewell Ave. Interchange
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+|
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 97
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 98
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
they provide. While such uses are often exempt from property taxation,
|
||
they contribute to the economy in many other ways. In general, large
|
||
institutions are not as sensitive t o economic cycles as other employment
|
||
sectors. Thus, they provide an important stabilizing effect on the economy.
|
||
|
||
In general, the character and scale of Tazewell’s institutions are expected
|
||
to remain relatively stable in the foreseeable future. Future expansions of
|
||
moderate size should be anticipated and appropriately planned at the
|
||
community hospital to address the health care needs of an aging population.
|
||
|
||
From an economic perspective, all of the town’s institutions enjoy favorable
|
||
locations, with many activities conducted during and after business hours.
|
||
The potential for employees and visitors to these complexes to interact
|
||
with other parts of Tazewell is therefore quite high.
|
||
|
||
Land use and planning objectives for the institutional areas include the
|
||
following:
|
||
|
||
• The Town should continue to coordinate the needs and future plans
|
||
of the major community institutions in order to maximize the
|
||
benefits of their respective locations.
|
||
|
||
• Intermixing and interaction of uses with surrounding u s e s should
|
||
be generally encouraged. Where new facilities are planned in urban
|
||
locations, development and design should promote street activity and
|
||
positive interaction with surrounding uses.
|
||
|
||
• To accommodate expansion needs, infill development and higher
|
||
densities, where appropriate, are desirable, to minimize the amount of
|
||
land removed from the tax rolls.
|
||
|
||
INDUSTRIAL USES
|
||
Industrial uses are a catalyst for other forms of development, particularly in
|
||
the fringe areas of Tazewell. The Land Use Plan establishes one designation
|
||
for industrial development:
|
||
|
||
I. Limited Industrial Areas intended for clean, low-intensity types of industry that are sited
|
||
in urban locations, adequately buffered from existing neighborhoods
|
||
and near arterial roads. Includes warehousing, wholesaling, light
|
||
manufacturing and processing operations, as well as associated office
|
||
development. This designation also includes planned business park
|
||
and light industrial developments and similar forms of compatible,
|
||
mixed-use development.
|
||
|
||
they provide. While such uses are often exempt from property taxation,
|
||
they contribute to the economy in many other ways. In general, large
|
||
institutions are not as sensitive to economic cycles as other employment
|
||
sectors. Thus, they provide an important stabilizing effect on the economy.
|
||
|
||
In general, the character and scale of Tazewell's institutions are expected
|
||
to remain relatively stable in the foreseeable future. Future expansions of
|
||
moderate size should be anticipated and appropriately planned at the
|
||
‘community hospital to address the health care needs of an aging population.
|
||
|
||
From an economic perspective, all of the town's institutions enjoy favorable
|
||
locations, with many activities conducted during and after business hours.
|
||
The potential for employees and visitors to these complexes to interact
|
||
with other parts of Tazewell is therefore quite high.
|
||
|
||
Land use and planning objectives for the institutional areas include the
|
||
|
||
following:
|
||
|
||
* The Town should continue to coordinate the needs and future plans
|
||
|
||
of the major community institutions in order to maximize the
|
||
benefits of their respective locations.
|
||
|
||
® Intermixing and interaction of uses with surrounding uses should
|
||
be generally encouraged. Where new facilities are planned in urban
|
||
|
||
locations, development and design should promote street activity and
|
||
Positive interaction with surrounding uses.
|
||
|
||
To accommodate expansion needs, infill development and higher
|
||
|
||
densities, where appropriate, are desirable, to minimize the amount of
|
||
land removed from the tax rolls.
|
||
|
||
INDUSTRIAL USES
|
||
|
||
Industrial uses are a catalyst for other forms of development, particularly in
|
||
the fringe areas of Tazewell. The Land Use Plan establishes one designation
|
||
for industrial development:
|
||
|
||
I. Limited Industrial
|
||
|
||
Areas intended for clean, low-intensity types of industry that are sited
|
||
in urban locations, adequately buffered from existing neighborhoods
|
||
and near arterial roads. Includes warehousing, wholesaling, light
|
||
manufacturing and processing operations, as well as associated office
|
||
development. This designation also includes planned business park
|
||
and light industrial developments and similar forms of compatible,
|
||
mixed-use development.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 98
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 99
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
DESIGNATED AREAS OF INDUSTRIAL USE As discussed under the existing land use analysis, the Tazewell area has
|
||
attracted limited industrial development in recent years. Although some
|
||
light industry is located in Tazewell, most industrial enterpr ise is situated
|
||
outside the Town.
|
||
|
||
Over the next twenty years, industrial growth will continue to play an
|
||
important role in shaping Tazewell’s future. This will be particularly true of
|
||
the town’s surrounding environs, where larger, more favorable sites for
|
||
industry are generally located. Although Tazewell itself enjoys a diverse
|
||
economy, growth prospects for the surrounding area will hinge, at least in
|
||
part, on the community’s ability to retain and attract industry.
|
||
|
||
In general, industrial uses are designated for established industrial areas in
|
||
and near the Town, as well as adjoining areas where similar development is
|
||
expected to occur. The Plan makes no distinction between light and heavier
|
||
types of industrial use; however a mixture of industrial uses can coexist in
|
||
some locations. This is particularly true of the area’s planned industrial
|
||
parks, which can offer flexible siting and buffering arrangements to suit
|
||
specific industry needs.
|
||
|
||
Limited types of light industry and distribution development are designated
|
||
within town along Riverside Drive and Walnut Street. Most of these areas
|
||
offer limited opportunities for expansion, due to adjoining neighborhoods,
|
||
the Clinch River, the Norfolk and Western Railroad, and other site constraints.
|
||
|
||
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT Over the 20-year timeframe of the Plan, some industrial uses near Tazewell
|
||
may be eventually incorporated into the Town boundaries. Preferably,
|
||
such a scenario would entail coordination with Tazewell County and increased
|
||
Town involvement in promoting industrial development.
|
||
|
||
In future years, it would be in Tazewell’s best interest to participate in
|
||
planning for these areas, particularly as the County shifts its attention to
|
||
larger industrial centers elsewhere in the region. For example, continued
|
||
marketing and management efforts will be needed at Tazewell Industrial
|
||
Park, in order to broaden its mix of industrial tenants and encourage other
|
||
park improvements.
|
||
|
||
If the Town elects to become more engaged in directing local industrial
|
||
development, various exploratory measures should be considered and
|
||
pursued. For the immediate time period ahead, Town, County and regional
|
||
officials should concentrate on developing a collaborative working
|
||
relationship, with the main emphasis on industrial recruitment and joint
|
||
marketing endeavors. Over time, this relationship could be expanded to
|
||
address issues more directly related to industrial site development and
|
||
management. To this end, it is recommended that a dialogue be initiated
|
||
|
||
DESIGNATED AREAS OF INDUSTRIAL USE
|
||
|
||
As discussed under the existing land use analysis, the Tazewell area has
|
||
attracted limited industrial development in recent years. Although some
|
||
light industry is located in Tazewell, most industrial enterprise is situated
|
||
outside the Town
|
||
|
||
Over the next twenty years, industrial growth will continue to play an
|
||
importantrole in shaping Tazewell’s future. This will be particularly true of
|
||
the town’s surrounding environs, where larger, more favorable sites for
|
||
industry are generally located. Although Tazewell itself enjoys a diverse
|
||
‘economy, growth prospects for the surrounding area will hinge, at least in
|
||
part, on the communitySability to retain and attract industry.
|
||
|
||
In general, industrial uses are designated for established industrial areas in
|
||
andnear the Town, aswell as adjoining areas where similar development is
|
||
‘expected to occur. The Plan makes no distinction between light and heavier
|
||
types of industrial use; however a mixture of industrial uses can coexist in
|
||
some locations. Thisis particularly true of the area’s planned industrial
|
||
parks, which can offer flexible siting and buffering arrangements to suit
|
||
specific industry needs.
|
||
|
||
Limited types of light industry and distribution development are designated
|
||
within town along Riverside Drive and Walnut Street. Most of these areas
|
||
offer limited opportunities for expansion, due to adjoining neighborhoods,
|
||
the Clinch River, the Norfolk and Western Railroad, and other site constraints.
|
||
|
||
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT
|
||
|
||
Over the 20-year timeframe of the Plan, some industrial uses near Tazewell
|
||
may be eventually incorporated into the Town boundaries. Preferably,
|
||
such a scenario would entail coordination with Tazewell County and increased
|
||
‘Town involvement in promoting industrial development.
|
||
|
||
In future years, it would be in Tazewell’s best interest to participate in
|
||
planning for these areas, particularly as the County shifts its attention to
|
||
larger industrial centers elsewhere in the region. For example, continued
|
||
marketing and management efforts will be needed at Tazewell Industrial
|
||
Park, in order to broaden its mix of industrial tenants and encourage other
|
||
park improvements.
|
||
|
||
If the Town elects to become more engaged in directing local industrial
|
||
development, various exploratory measures should be considered and
|
||
pursued. For the immediate time period ahead, Town, County and regional
|
||
officials should concentrate on developing a collaborative working
|
||
relationship, with the main emphasis on industrial recruitment and joint
|
||
marketing endeavors. Over time, this relationship could be expanded to
|
||
address issues more directly related to industrial site development and
|
||
management. To this end, it is recommended that a dialogue be initiated
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+|
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 99
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 100
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
between the Town and the County Industrial Development Authority (IDA)
|
||
to discuss areas of mutual interest and possible interaction. If a successful
|
||
partnership were formed, this increased interaction would strengthen the
|
||
area’s industrial base and foster manufacturing growth throughout central
|
||
Tazewell County. This, in turn, would strengthen the employment and tax
|
||
base of both jurisdictions.
|
||
|
||
RESIDENTIAL USES Three broad types of residential use are proposed based on housing type
|
||
and density. These include areas of low, medium and high-density residential
|
||
use. In addition, a rural residential category is proposed in conjunction with
|
||
agricultural uses. A description of each designation follows:
|
||
|
||
I. Low-Density Residential (1-6 du/acre) Neighborhoods or areas intended primarily for single-family detached
|
||
and attached units with densities generally below six dwelling units
|
||
per acre. Within this category, the zoning ordinance should specify
|
||
more detailed density requirements consistent with the area’s character
|
||
and the availability of public utilities. Concentrations of manufactured
|
||
homes and higher-intensity residential uses are not encouraged.
|
||
|
||
II. Medium-Density Residential (6-10 du/acre) Neighborhoods or areas that allow for single-family detached and
|
||
attached units, duplexes, triplexes and manufactured homes. Within
|
||
this category, the zoning ordinance should specify more detailed
|
||
density requirements consistent with the area’s character. Public water
|
||
and sewer must be available to serve medium-density areas.
|
||
|
||
III. High-Density Residential (over 10 du/acre) Neighborhoods or areas which allow a greater density and variation
|
||
of housing types. Within this category, the zoning ordinance should
|
||
specify more detailed density requirements and types of permitted
|
||
uses. Generally, appropriate uses include apartment buildings,
|
||
townhouses, condominiums and other higher intensity forms of
|
||
residential development. Public water and sewer must be available
|
||
to serve high-density areas.
|
||
|
||
These three land use designations are intentionally broad and for general
|
||
planning purposes only. They should not be confused with existing zoning ,
|
||
which under the current ordinance specifies four types of zoning classifications
|
||
pertaining to residential use. The zoning regulations should continue to
|
||
govern specific site features, such as lot size, dimension and setback
|
||
requirements. As suggested under the Plan Implementation section, however,
|
||
|
||
between the Town and the County Industrial Development Authority (IDA)
|
||
to discuss areas of mutual interest and possible interaction. If a successful
|
||
partnership were formed, this increased interaction would strengthen the
|
||
area's industrial base and foster manufacturing growth throughout central
|
||
Tazewell County. This, in turn, would strengthen the employment and tax
|
||
base of both jurisdic
|
||
|
||
RESIDENTIAL USES
|
||
|
||
Three broad types of residential use are proposed based on housing type
|
||
and density. These include areas of low, medium and high-density residential
|
||
use. In addition, a rural residential category is proposed in conjunction with
|
||
agricultural uses. A description of each designation follows:
|
||
|
||
1. Low-Density Residential (1-6 du/acre)
|
||
|
||
Neighborhoods or areas intended primarily for single-family detached
|
||
and attached units with densities generally below six dwelling units
|
||
per acre. Within this category, the zoning ordinance should specify
|
||
more detailed density requirements consistent with the area's character
|
||
and the availability of public utilities. Concentrations of manufactured
|
||
homes and higher-intensity residential uses are not encouraged.
|
||
|
||
I. Medium-Density Residential (6-10 du/acre)
|
||
|
||
Neighborhoods or areas that allow for single-family detached and
|
||
attached units, duplexes, triplexes and manufactured homes. Withit
|
||
this category, the zoning ordinance should specify more detailed
|
||
density requirements consistent with the area's character. Public water
|
||
and sewer must be available to serve medium-density areas.
|
||
|
||
IIl, High-Density Residential (over 10 du/acre)
|
||
|
||
Neighborhoods or areas which allow a greater density and variation
|
||
of housing types. Within this category, the zoning ordinance should
|
||
specify more detailed density requirements and types of permitted
|
||
uses. Generally, appropriate uses include apartment buildings,
|
||
townhouses, condominiums and other higher intensity forms of
|
||
residential development. Public water and sewer must be available
|
||
to serve high-density areas.
|
||
|
||
These three land use designations are intentionally broad and for general
|
||
planning purposes only. They should not be confused with existing zoning,
|
||
which under the current ordinance specifies four types of zoning classifications
|
||
pertaining to residential use. The zoning regulations should continue to
|
||
govern specific site features, such as lot size, dimension and setback
|
||
requirements. As suggested under the Plan Implementation section, however,
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 100
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 101
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
some additional clarifications may be needed to communicate these
|
||
variations and the design objectives applicable to each district.
|
||
|
||
One of the underlying themes of this Plan is to encourage complementary,
|
||
mixed-use development — both in the town’s business districts and in its
|
||
residential areas. In recent times, there has been growing evidence that
|
||
traditional zoning , unless carefully applied, tends to segregate urban uses
|
||
more than necessary, requiring residents to drive to reach work, shopping
|
||
and recreation. Fortunately, much of Tazewell was developed prior to the
|
||
post-war period, when single-use, segregated zoning was not in widespread
|
||
use.
|
||
|
||
More recently, Tazewell has experienced a small increase in multi-family
|
||
development. Rather than directing this growth to heavily concentrated
|
||
areas, local officials have allowed a variety of housing types to develop
|
||
throughout town, so long as these uses did not present any significant land
|
||
use conflict with the surrounding area. As a result, many of the Tazewell’s
|
||
older neighborhoods presently contain a compatible blend of single-family
|
||
and multi-family uses. The Plan seeks to preserve this mixed-use residential
|
||
character in older areas of town, while also encouraging master-planned
|
||
and neo-traditional development in the peripheral areas of Tazewell. DESIGNATED AREAS OF RESIDENTIAL USE The general extent and location of residential areas are indicated on the
|
||
Future Land Use Map. A general goal of the Plan is to maintain existing
|
||
patterns of residential development throughout the Tazewell area. Infill
|
||
development and higher density housing should be encouraged where it
|
||
will not have harmful effects upon the surrounding neighborhood. A related
|
||
strategy is to concentrate residential development in compact growth areas
|
||
sited in or near the pre-2000 Town boundary. This will help minimize costs
|
||
for public services and preserve the rural character of fringe areas.
|
||
|
||
LOWER-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USE Lower-density residential use is designated for established single-family areas
|
||
in and around the town, as well as nearby vacant areas where similar
|
||
development is expected to occur. Existing low-density areas are generally
|
||
situated on larger lots (over 1/4 acre) within several distinct suburban
|
||
neighborhoods and subdivisions. In order to maintain stable homeownership
|
||
and property values, these lower-density areas should accommodate one
|
||
and two-family units only, at densities generally consistent with surrounding
|
||
development.
|
||
|
||
Within the town’s corporate boundary area, opportunities for new large-lot
|
||
development are somewhat limited, confined primarily to continued build-
|
||
out of subdivisions around the town’s periphery. The Plan recognizes that
|
||
the majority of large-lot residential development will continue to occur just
|
||
|
||
some additional clarifications may be needed to communicate these
|
||
variations and the design objectives applicable to each district.
|
||
|
||
One of the underlying themes of this Plan is to encourage complementary,
|
||
mixed-use development — both in the town's business districts and in its
|
||
residential areas. In recent times, there has been growing evidence that
|
||
traditional zoning, unless carefully applied, tends to segregate urban uses
|
||
more than necessary, requiring residents to drive to reach work, shopping
|
||
and recreation. Fortunately, much of Tazewell was developed prior to the
|
||
post-war period, when single-use, segregated zoning was not in widespread
|
||
use.
|
||
|
||
More recently, Tazewell has experienced a small increase in multi-family
|
||
development. Rather than directing this growth to heavily concentrated
|
||
areas, local officials have allowed a variety of housing types to develop
|
||
throughout town, so long as these uses did not present any significant land
|
||
use conflict with the surrounding area. As a result, many of the Tazewell’s
|
||
older neighborhoods presently contain a compatible blend of single-family
|
||
and multi-family uses. The Plan seeks to preserve this mixed-use residential
|
||
character in older areas of town, while also encouraging master-planned
|
||
andneo-traditional development in the peripheral areas of Tazewell
|
||
|
||
DESIGNATED AREAS OF RESIDENTIAL USE
|
||
|
||
The general extent and location of residential areas are indicated on the
|
||
Future Land UseMap. A general goal of the Planis to maintain existing
|
||
patterns of residential development throughout the Tazewell area. Infill
|
||
development and higher density housing should be encouraged where it
|
||
will not have harmful effects upon the surrounding neighborhood. A related
|
||
strategy is to concentrate residential development in compact growth areas
|
||
sited in or near the pre-2000 Town boundary. This will help minimize costs
|
||
for public services and preserve the rural character of fringe areas.
|
||
|
||
LOWER-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USE
|
||
|
||
Lower-density residential use is designated for established single-family areas
|
||
in and around the town, as well as nearby vacant areas where similar
|
||
development is expected to occur. Existing low-density areas are generally
|
||
situated on larger lots (over 1/4 acre) within several distinct suburban
|
||
neighborhoods and subdivisions. In order to maintain stable homeownership
|
||
and property values, these lower-density areas should accommodate one
|
||
and two-family units only, at densities generally consistent with surrounding
|
||
development.
|
||
|
||
Within the town's corporate boundary area, opportunities for new large-lot
|
||
development are somewhat limited, confined primarily to continued build-
|
||
‘out of subdivisions around the town’s periphery. The Plan recognizes that
|
||
the majority of large-lot residential development will continue to occur just
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 101
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 102
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
outside the corporate limits, particularly in locations northeast and southeast
|
||
of town. Like some in-town areas, these locations would lend themselves
|
||
well to density averaging or planned unit development (PUD) concepts,
|
||
given the often rolling , diverse landscapes and environmental features.
|
||
Outlying areas designated for lower-density residential growth are generally
|
||
sited upon the more gently sloped land accessible to major roads. Here,
|
||
quality building lots, public utilities and circulation can be readily provided.
|
||
However, the Town should also ensure that existing built-up areas are
|
||
adequately served before major service extensions are approved for outlying
|
||
subdivisions.
|
||
|
||
HIGHER-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USE The Plan designates higher-density residential use throughout older
|
||
neighborhoods of Town, as well as areas where moderate priced housing
|
||
and multi-family development is expected to occur. In the older
|
||
neighborhoods, smaller lot sizes prevail along with a more diverse housing
|
||
stock, including apartments and other group housing . Some of these older
|
||
neighborhoods are in transition, experiencing some slight decline and
|
||
transition from residential to commercial use.
|
||
|
||
In an effort to keep these areas active and healthy, vacant and underutilized
|
||
dwellings should be conditionally considered for conversion to other uses,
|
||
such as small offices, group homes and similar mixed-use development.
|
||
However, in each case, potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhood
|
||
should be carefully weighed before such conversions are approved. As a
|
||
general rule, larger apartments and manufactured home parks are best sited
|
||
on arterial roads near major centers of shopping and employment. In these
|
||
locations, high-volume circulation needs can be met without disrupting lower
|
||
density areas.
|
||
|
||
PUBLIC AND OPEN SPACE USES Public and open space uses are classified into the following four (4)
|
||
categories: I. Conservation/Open Space Areas (including greenway corridors) Areas deemed generally unsuitable for conventional urban
|
||
|
||
development due to the presence of 100-year floodplains, major
|
||
stream corridors or steep slopes (over 25% relief). This category includes
|
||
environmentally sensitive areas, where careful site planning and
|
||
management is needed in order to mitigate potential for flood damage
|
||
and/or soil erosion.
|
||
|
||
Recommended uses include greenway/open space corridors, passive
|
||
recreational activities, agricultural uses and facilities necessary for
|
||
|
||
outside the corporate limits, particularly in locations northeast and southeast
|
||
of town. Like some in-town areas, these locations would lend themselves
|
||
well to density averaging or planned unit development (PUD) concepts,
|
||
given the often rolling, diverse landscapes and environmental features.
|
||
Outlying areas designated for lower-density residential growth are generally
|
||
sited upon the more gently sloped land accessible to major roads. Here,
|
||
quality building lots, public utilities and circulation can be readily provided.
|
||
However, the Town should also ensure that existing built-up areas are
|
||
adequately served before major service extensions are approved for outlying
|
||
subdivisions.
|
||
|
||
HIGHER-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USE
|
||
|
||
The Plan designates higher-density residential use throughout older
|
||
neighborhoods of Town, as welll as areas where moderate priced housing
|
||
and multi-family development is expected to occur. In the older
|
||
neighborhoods, smaller lot sizes prevail along with a more diverse housing
|
||
stock, including apartments and other group housing. Some of these older
|
||
neighborhoods are in transition, experiencing some slight decline and
|
||
transition from residential to commercial use.
|
||
|
||
In an effortto keep these areas active and healthy, vacant and underutilized
|
||
dwellings should be conditionally considered for conversion to other uses,
|
||
‘such as smalloffices, group homes and similar mixed-use development.
|
||
However, in each case, potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhood
|
||
should be carefully weighed before such conversions are approved. As a
|
||
general rule, larger apartments and manufactured home parks are best sited
|
||
‘on arterial roads near major centers of shopping and employment. In these
|
||
locations, high-volume circulation needs can be met without disrupting lower
|
||
density areas.
|
||
|
||
PUBLIC AND OPEN SPACE USES
|
||
|
||
Public and open spaceuses are classified into the following four (4)
|
||
categories:
|
||
|
||
I. Conservation/Open Space Areas (including greenway corridors)
|
||
|
||
Areas deemed generally unsuitable for conventional urban
|
||
development due to the presence of 100-year floodplains, major
|
||
stream corridors or steep slopes (over 25% relief). This category includes
|
||
environmentally sensitive areas, where careful site planning and
|
||
management is needed in order to mitigate potential for flood damage
|
||
and/or soil erosion.
|
||
|
||
Recommended uses include greenway/open space corridors, passive
|
||
recreational activities, agricultural uses and facilities necessary for
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 102
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 103
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
rendering public utility service. New development within the 100-
|
||
year floodplain is discouraged.
|
||
|
||
II. Agricultural/Rural Residential Areas where active farmland or forestal uses are promoted. Residential
|
||
development is allowed at a rural density where public sewer is
|
||
unavailable and unlikely to be provided over the future planning period
|
||
(20 years). Rural residential development should be sited outside
|
||
sensitive natural areas and be capable of supporting on-site septic
|
||
systems.
|
||
|
||
III. Public/Institutional Areas which serve the functional, civic and institutional needs of the
|
||
town and surrounding area; including schools, cemeteries, hospitals,
|
||
fairgrounds and other public and semi-public uses.
|
||
|
||
IV. Parks and Recreation This category includes major parks and surrounding areas dedicated
|
||
primarily to active recreational use, including both public and privately
|
||
owned facilities.
|
||
|
||
CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE AREAS The conservation designation recommended for the Tazewell area mainly
|
||
includes those land features already protected in varying degrees by local,
|
||
state and federal regulatory codes. These regulations chiefly pertain to
|
||
100-year floodplains, first order streams, and the wetland area around the
|
||
Lincolnshire Park Lake. In the Tazewell area, 100-year floodplains fringe
|
||
the Clinch River although flash flooding may occur on lesser streams as
|
||
well. In general, the Plan map depicts undeveloped stream corridors as
|
||
conservation areas since these might be preserved during site development
|
||
or through open space dedication. This, however, does not preclude the
|
||
need for protection efforts including erosion and sediment controls and
|
||
stormwater management along the more urban stream corridors. Best
|
||
Management Practices (BMP’s) recommended by the Virginia Department
|
||
of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) should be adopted and promoted by
|
||
the County and the Town.
|
||
|
||
In addition to rural stream corridors, the Plan designates other areas for
|
||
genera l conservat ion. These features include certa in s teep or
|
||
environmentally sensitive terrain, and greenway corridors proposed under
|
||
the Greenways and Gateways Plan. The Plan map generalizes all of the
|
||
conservation/open space areas shown. These designations are for general
|
||
planning purposes, as needed to encourage voluntary easements, proffers,
|
||
dedications and public open space initiatives.
|
||
|
||
rendering public utility service. New development within the 100-
|
||
year floodplain is discouraged.
|
||
|
||
W Agricultural/Rural Residential
|
||
|
||
‘Areas where active farmland or forestal uses are promoted. Residential
|
||
developments allowed at a rural density where public sewer is
|
||
unavailable and unlikely to be provided over the future planning period
|
||
(20 years). Rural residential development should be sited outside
|
||
sensitive natural areas and be capable of supporting on-site septic
|
||
systems.
|
||
|
||
WI. Public/Institutional
|
||
|
||
‘Areas which serve the functional, civic and institutional needs of the
|
||
town and surrounding area; including schools, cemeteries, hospitals,
|
||
fairgrounds and other public and semi-public uses.
|
||
|
||
IV. Parks and Recreation
|
||
|
||
This category includes major parks and surrounding areas dedicated
|
||
primarily to active recreational use, including both public and privately
|
||
owned facilities.
|
||
|
||
CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE AREAS
|
||
|
||
The conservation designation recommended for the Tazewell area mainly
|
||
includes those land features already protected in varying degrees by local,
|
||
state and federal regulatory codes. These regulations chiefly pertain to
|
||
|
||
10-year floodplains, first order streams, and the wetland area around the
|
||
Lincolnshire Park Lake. In the Tazewell area, 100-year floodplains fringe
|
||
the Clinch River although flash flooding may occur on lesser streams. as
|
||
well. In general, the Plan map depicts undeveloped stream corridors as
|
||
conservation areas since these might be preserved during site development
|
||
or through open space dedication. This, however, does not preclude the
|
||
need for protection efforts including erosion and sediment controls and
|
||
stormwatermanagement along the more urban stream corridors. Best
|
||
Management Practices (BMP’s) recommended by the Virginia Department
|
||
of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) should be adopted and promoted by
|
||
the County and the Town.
|
||
|
||
In addition to rural stream corridors, the Plan designates other areas for
|
||
general conservation. These features include certain steep or
|
||
environmentally sensitive terrain, and greenway corridors proposed under
|
||
the Greenways and Gateways Plan. The Plan map generalizes all of the
|
||
conservation/open space areas shown. These designations are for general
|
||
planning purposes, asneeded to encourage voluntary easements, proffers,
|
||
dedications and public open space initiatives.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 103
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 104
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
AGRICULTURAL/RURAL RESIDENTIAL A key objective of the Land Use Plan is to promote compact, efficient
|
||
patterns of development. As a general rule, infill development on sites
|
||
within Town is preferable to further suburban sprawl in areas incorporated
|
||
into the town through the 2000 boundary adjustment. This strategy will
|
||
minimize consumption of land, consolidate the urban environment, help
|
||
preserve the fringe area’s rural character and discourage development that
|
||
will jeopardize the area’s scenic views.
|
||
|
||
The agricultural/rural residential areas indicated by the Plan are those areas
|
||
where land is suitable for development but because of distance from the
|
||
town and costs to extend public utilities, urban forms of development are
|
||
unlikely to occur during the planning period. Additional residential
|
||
development of a rural nature should be accommodated for persons wishing
|
||
to live on farms, estates, or large lots served by wells and on-site septic
|
||
systems. However, the Plan generally seeks to preserve the rural character
|
||
of the fringe areas and promote continued resource-related uses, such as
|
||
farming , grazing and forestry while discouraging intensive agricultural uses
|
||
such as feedlots, poultry houses and hog farms.
|
||
|
||
As depicted by the Plan, a large amount of agricultural and open land near
|
||
the town’s historic corporate boundary is designated for residential use.
|
||
Much of this land is presently used as pasture. Preservation of this agricultural
|
||
land near town should be a land use goal for the Town of Tazewell. In
|
||
recent years, it has also become a matter of statewide and national interest
|
||
to protect agricultural resources. For that matter, it is also in the best
|
||
economic interest of Tazewell that these lands remain productive until they
|
||
are needed for urban purposes. This may best be accomplished by
|
||
maintaining agricultural zoning classifications that do not inhibit agricultural
|
||
use prior to an actual development proposal.
|
||
|
||
In addition, it is important that large undeveloped parcels now in town be
|
||
appropriately protected from piecemeal development. To this end, certain
|
||
minor revisions are recommended for the Town’s agricultural zoning category
|
||
under the implementation section of the Plan. These revisions, if
|
||
implemented, would help further safeguard large acreage parcels from
|
||
undesirable subdivision development and maintain agricultural operations
|
||
for as long as possible.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY FACILITIES The public/institutional facilities throughout Tazewell are well distributed
|
||
and adequately serve the population. No other major changes in the
|
||
distribution of community facilities are recommended for the purposes of
|
||
this Plan. Ongoing expansions and improvements to town facilities can
|
||
generally be accomplished at existing sites. The downtown area should
|
||
|
||
AGRICULTURAL/RURAL RESIDENTIAL
|
||
|
||
A key objective of the Land Use Plan is to promote compact, efficient
|
||
patterns of development. As a general rule, infill developmenton sites
|
||
within Town is preferable to further suburban sprawl in areas incorporated
|
||
into the town through the 2000 boundary adjustment. This strategy will
|
||
minimize consumption of land, consolidate the urban environment, help
|
||
preserve the fringe area's rural character and discourage development that
|
||
will jeopardize the area's scenic views.
|
||
|
||
The agricultural/rural residential areas indicated by the Plan are those areas
|
||
where land is suitable for development but because of distance from the
|
||
town and costs to extend public utilities, urban forms of development are
|
||
unlikely to occur during the planning period. Additional residential
|
||
development of a rural nature should be accommodated for persons wishing
|
||
to live on farms, estates, or large lots served by wells and on-site septic
|
||
systems. However, the Plan generally seeks to preserve the rural character
|
||
of the fringe areas and promote continued resource-related uses, such as
|
||
farming, grazing and forestry while discouraging intensive agricultural uses
|
||
such as feediots, poultry houses and hog farms.
|
||
|
||
Asdepicted by the Plan, a large amountof agricultural and open land near
|
||
the town's historic corporate boundary is designated for residential use.
|
||
Much of this land is presently used as pasture. Preservation of this agricultural
|
||
land near town should be a land use goal for the Town of Tazewell. In
|
||
recent years, it has also become amatter of statewide and national interest
|
||
to protect agricultural resources. For that matter, it is also in the best
|
||
‘economic interest of Tazewell that these lands remain productive until they
|
||
are needed for urban purposes. This may best be accomplished by
|
||
maintaining agricultural zoning classifications that do not inhibit agricultural
|
||
use prior to an actual development proposal.
|
||
|
||
In addition, it is important that large undeveloped parcels now in town be
|
||
appropriately protected from piecemeal development. To this end, certain
|
||
minor revisions are recommended for the Town's agricultural zoning category
|
||
under the implementation section of the Plan. Theserevisions, if
|
||
implemented, would help further safeguard large acreage parcels from
|
||
undesirable subdivision development and maintain agricultural operations
|
||
for as longas possible.
|
||
|
||
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
The public/institutional facilities throughout Tazewell are welll distributed
|
||
and adequately serve the population. No other major changes in the
|
||
distribution of community facilities are recommended for the purposes of
|
||
this Plan. Ongoing expansions and improvements to town facilities can
|
||
generally be accomplished at existing sites. The downtown area should
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 104
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 105
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
continue to be the focal point for most community facilities. As growth
|
||
demands of the region dictate, the Town should coordinate with Tazewell
|
||
County and other service providers in choosing facility sites to best serve
|
||
area residents.
|
||
|
||
PARKS & RECREATION Recreation improvements presently being planned or considered by the
|
||
Town are discussed in the Community Facilities section of the Plan. Most of
|
||
these improvements involve upgrades or enhancements to existing park
|
||
facilities at Lincolnshire Park. If implemented as planned, these improvements
|
||
will demonstrate Tazewell’s continued commitment to providing high quality
|
||
recreation services.
|
||
|
||
In future years, as Tazewell’s population changes, there will be a
|
||
corresponding need for additional parks and recreation opportunities,
|
||
particularly at the neighborhood level. As future sites are evaluated, efforts
|
||
should be made to preserve and integrate certain natural features, landscapes,
|
||
scenic vistas and historic qualities which make the Tazewell area unique.
|
||
Combining these various elements would also contribute to development
|
||
of a fully diverse and comprehensive park system. In support of this
|
||
objective, the Greenways and Gateways Plan offers several opportunities
|
||
to expand recreation, while building on the area’s unique features.
|
||
|
||
Although the above proposals are ambitious, they need not be initiated or
|
||
financed wholly by local government. Instead, it is envisioned that the
|
||
Town increasingly share in park and open space development costs with a
|
||
broad range of partners. Ideally, these partnerships would originate from
|
||
various sources and segments of the community. These might include, but
|
||
need not be limited to local civic groups, environmental interests, private
|
||
developers, individual property owners, neighboring localities and appropriate
|
||
state and federal agencies.
|
||
|
||
In addition, the Town should continue to encourage the provision of private
|
||
recreation facilities, such as those currently serving Little League baseball,
|
||
and swimming pools. As a general rule, new residential subdivisions of a
|
||
significant size should include land dedicated for neighborhood parks and
|
||
play areas. Preferably, local community associations should assume
|
||
maintenance of these facilities.
|
||
|
||
continue to be the focal point for most community facilities. As growth
|
||
demands of the region dictate, the Town should coordinate with Tazewell
|
||
County and other service providers in choosing facility sites to best serve
|
||
area residents.
|
||
|
||
PARKS & RECREATION
|
||
|
||
Recreation improvements presently being planned or considered by the
|
||
‘Town are discussed in the Community Facilities section of the Plan. Most of
|
||
these improvements involve upgrades or enhancements to existing park
|
||
facilities at Lincolnshire Park. Ifimplemented as planned, these improvements
|
||
will demonstrate Tazewell’s continued commitment to providing high quality
|
||
recreation services.
|
||
|
||
In future years, as Tazewell’s population changes, there will be a
|
||
corresponding need for additional parks and recreation opportunities,
|
||
particularly at the neighborhood level. As future sites are evaluated, efforts
|
||
should be made to preserve and integrate certain natural features, landscapes,
|
||
scenic vistas and historic qualities which make the Tazewell area unique.
|
||
Combining these various elements would also contribute to development
|
||
of a fully diverse and comprehensive park system. In support of this
|
||
objective, the Greenways and Gateways Plan offers several opportunities
|
||
to expand recreation, while building on the area's unique features.
|
||
|
||
Although the above proposals are ambitious, they need not be initiated or
|
||
financed wholly by local government. Instead, it is envisioned that the
|
||
‘Town increasingly share in park and open space development costs with a
|
||
broad range of partners. Ideally, these partnerships would originate from
|
||
various sources and segments of the community. These might include, but
|
||
need not be limited to local civic groups, environmental interests, private
|
||
developers, individual property owners, neighboring localities and appropriate
|
||
state and federal agencies.
|
||
|
||
In addition, the Town should continue to encourage the provision of private
|
||
recreation facilities, such asthose currently serving Little League baseball,
|
||
and swimming pools. As a general rule, new residential subdivisions of a
|
||
ignificant size should include land dedicated for neighborhood parks and
|
||
play areas. Preferably, local community associations should assume
|
||
maintenance of these facilities.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE+
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 105
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 106
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
|
||
A safe and efficient transportation system is a key aspect of community
|
||
development. Not only do transportation facilities serve the needs of existing
|
||
residents, they also influence the location of future development and
|
||
economic activity. Tazewell’s roadway network includes major and minor
|
||
arterial roads that serve regional and local traffic as well as collector and
|
||
local streets that primarily serve local traffic. In addition to the roadway
|
||
network, Tazewell’s transportation network is comprised of parking facilities;
|
||
non-vehicular facilities such as sidewalks and bikeways; and other transit
|
||
services such as rail, motor freight, bus, taxi, paratransit and airport facilities.
|
||
|
||
THE TAZEWELL 2020 TRANSPORTATION PLAN In 2000, The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) in cooperation
|
||
with the Town of Tazewell developed the Tazewell 2020 Transportation
|
||
Plan. A finite urban area was established for purposes of this study, which
|
||
followed the corporate limits of the Town as of 1999 and subsequently
|
||
included the area added to the Town through a boundary adjustment with
|
||
Tazewell County in 2010. The study provided an analysis and
|
||
recommendations for improvements to selected collectors and arterials within
|
||
the urban thoroughfare system.
|
||
|
||
The principal collectors and arterials identified in the study included:
|
||
VA 61(Riverside Drive)
|
||
•US 460 and US 19 Business (Fincastle Turnpike)
|
||
•Alt VA 16 (Fairground Road)
|
||
•VA 16 (Tazewell Avenue)
|
||
|
||
(Work was already underway to improve Ben Bolt Avenue at the time of
|
||
the study.)
|
||
|
||
Recommendations for improvements to these roadways were divided into
|
||
three Phases:
|
||
|
||
PHASE ONE: BASE YEAR ROADWAY RECOMMENDATIONS
|
||
• Provide left turn lanes at the intersection where Riverside Drive
|
||
|
||
branches south from Market Street to improve access to the
|
||
commercial development located here.
|
||
|
||
• At Market Street and Riverside Drive, realign the intersection to
|
||
improve turning and to allow for the traffic light to operate in all
|
||
four directions instead of three.
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
|
||
|
||
A safe and efficient transportation system is a key aspect of community
|
||
development. Not only do transportation facilities serve the needs of existing
|
||
residents, they also influence the location of future development and
|
||
economic activity. Tazewell’s roadway network includes major and minor
|
||
arterial roads that serve regional and local traffic as well as collector and
|
||
local streets that primarily serve local traffic. In addition to the roadway
|
||
network, Tazewell’s transportation network is comprised of parking facilities;
|
||
non-vehicular facilities such as sidewalks and bikeways; and other transit
|
||
services such as rail, motor freight, bus, taxi, paratransit and airportfa
|
||
|
||
THE TAZEWELL 2020 TRANSPORTATION PLAN
|
||
|
||
In 2000, The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) in cooperation
|
||
with the Town of Tazewell developed the Tazewell 2020 Transportation
|
||
Plan, A finite urban area was established for purposes of this study, which
|
||
followed the corporate limits of the Town as of 1999 and subsequently
|
||
included the area added to the Town through a boundary adjustment with
|
||
Tazewell County in 2010. The study provided an analysis and
|
||
recommendations for improvements to selected collectors and arterials within
|
||
the urban thoroughfare system.
|
||
|
||
The principalcollectors and arterials identified in the study included:
|
||
© VAG61 (Riverside Drive)
|
||
|
||
© Us 460 and US 19 Business (Fincastle Turnpike)
|
||
|
||
© Alt\VA 16 (Fairground Road)
|
||
© VA 16 (Tazewell Avenue)
|
||
|
||
(Work was already underway to improve Ben Bolt Avenue at the time of
|
||
the study.)
|
||
|
||
Recommendations for improvements to these roadways were divided into
|
||
three Phases:
|
||
|
||
PHASE ONE: BASE YEAR ROADWAY RECOMMENDATIONS.
|
||
|
||
‘Provide left turn lanes at the intersection where Riverside Drive
|
||
branches south from Market Streetto improve access to the
|
||
commercial development located here.
|
||
|
||
‘At Market Street and Riverside Drive, realign the intersection to
|
||
|
||
improve turning and to allow for the tra
|
||
four directions instead of three.
|
||
|
||
ht to operate in all
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +]
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 106
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 107
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
• From Market Street south to its intersection with Fincastle Turnpike,
|
||
widen the road to a three-lane cross section with a continuous
|
||
turning lane in order to accommodate industrial traffic entering from
|
||
Walnut Street.
|
||
|
||
• At the intersection of Market Street and Fincastle Turnpike, widen the
|
||
turning radius in the northwest quadrant of the intersection.
|
||
|
||
•Install a traffic light at the intersection of Fincastle Turnpike and
|
||
Ben Bolt Avenue. (This has been completed).
|
||
|
||
• Fincastle Turnpike in the area of Bulldog Lane requires Transportation
|
||
System Management (TSM) improvements. Possible improvements
|
||
include a traffic signal at the entrance to the high school campus
|
||
and turning lanes and a traffic signal where Steeles Lane intersects
|
||
with Fincastle Turnpike.
|
||
|
||
PHASE TWO: INTERIM YEAR (2010) ROADWAY RECOMMENDATIONS
|
||
• Reconstruct portions of Fairground Road that are in the current
|
||
|
||
corporate limits to a two-lane cross-section with paved shoulders,
|
||
curb and gutter.
|
||
|
||
PHASE THREE: STUDY YEAR (2020) ROADWAY RECOMMENDATIONS
|
||
• Widen Riverside Drive to four lanes from the old corporate limit just
|
||
|
||
east of the US 460/19 bypass to the point where it turns south from
|
||
Market Street.
|
||
|
||
• Reconstruct Tazewell Avenue between Riverside Drive and
|
||
Fincastle Turnpike.
|
||
|
||
• Widen the turning radius at the intersection of Tazewell Avenue and
|
||
Riverside Drive.
|
||
|
||
Widen the intersection of Fairground Road and Riverside Drive. In addition to the 2020 transportation plan for the Town of Tazewell, the
|
||
Virginia Transportation Development Plan (VTDP) also addresses
|
||
transportation needs. The VDTP lists transportation projects scheduled for
|
||
construction or improvement over the next six fiscal years, as well as
|
||
anticipated funding allocations. The following improvements are identified
|
||
in the six-year plan for Tazewell for Fiscal Years 04/09:
|
||
|
||
• Provide four-lanes with curb and gutter for Fairground Road from
|
||
its intersection with the US 19/460 bypass south to West Main
|
||
|
||
From Market Street south to its intersection with Fincastle Turnpike,
|
||
widen the road to a three-lane cross section with a continuous
|
||
turning lane in order to accommodate industrial traffic entering from
|
||
Walnut Street.
|
||
|
||
Atthe intersection of Market Street and Fincastle Turnpike, widen the
|
||
|
||
turning radius in the northwest quadrant of the intersection.
|
||
|
||
® installa traffic light at the intersection of Fincastle Turnpike and
|
||
Ben Bolt Avenue. (This has been completed).
|
||
|
||
Fincastle Turnpike in the area of Bulldog Lane requires Transportation
|
||
|
||
System Management (TSM) improvements. Possible improvements
|
||
include a traffic signal at the entrance to the high school campus
|
||
and turning lanes and a traffic signal where Steeles Lane intersects
|
||
with Fincastle Turnpike.
|
||
|
||
PHASE TWO: INTERIM YEAR (2010) ROADWAY RECOMMENDATIONS
|
||
Reconstruct portions of Fairground Road that are in the current
|
||
|
||
corporate limits to a two-lane cross-section with paved shoulders,
|
||
curb and gutter.
|
||
|
||
PHASE THREE: STUDY YEAR (2020) ROADWAY RECOMMENDATIONS
|
||
|
||
Widen Riverside Drive to four lanes from the old corporate limit just
|
||
|
||
eastof the US 460/19 bypass to the point whereii turns south from
|
||
Market Street.
|
||
|
||
© Reconstruct Tazewell Avenue between Riverside Drive and
|
||
Fincastle Tumpike
|
||
|
||
Witien the turning radius at the intersection of Tazewell Avenue and
|
||
Riverside Drive,
|
||
|
||
Widen the intersection of Fairground Road and Riverside Drive.
|
||
|
||
In addition to the 2020 transportation plan for the Town of Tazewell, the
|
||
‘ginia Transportation Development Plan (VTDP) also addresses
|
||
transportation needs. The VDTP lists transportation projects scheduled for
|
||
construction or improvement over the next six fiscal years, as well as
|
||
anticipated funding allocations. The following improvements are identified
|
||
in the six-year plan for Tazewell for Fiscal Years 04/09:
|
||
|
||
Provide four-lanes with curb and gutter for Fairground Road from
|
||
its intersection with the US 19/460 bypass south to West Main
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 107
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 108
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Street. Construct Park and Ride lot on Fairground Road at the
|
||
interchange.
|
||
|
||
• Add curb and gutter, sidewalks and drainage structures along Fincastle
|
||
Turnpike from its intersection with Market Street north to the
|
||
corporate limits.
|
||
|
||
•Add curb and gutter, sidewalks and drainage structures along
|
||
Maplewood Avenue from Carline Avenue to Bulldog Lane. The above referenced improvements are illustrated on the Transportation
|
||
|
||
Map on the following page. PARKING FACILITIES DOWNTOWN PARKING Parking facilities in the downtown Tazewell area include on-street parking
|
||
and surface parking lots at most public buildings and businesses. The Town
|
||
and County also provide a variety of parking facilities for public use, including
|
||
paved parking lots at the rear of the Courthouse/Administration Building
|
||
and the County Library. All of these lots are well maintained.
|
||
|
||
At present, on-street parking in Tazewell is entirely unmetered. Downtown
|
||
parking remains restricted to two-hour periods on Main Street. This helps
|
||
to maximize the availability of spaces for short-term users, such as shoppers,
|
||
tourists and patrons of the downtown area. Long term users, such as
|
||
downtown employees, are encouraged to park on private lots to the side or
|
||
rear of their buildings.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS In some sections of downtown, the lack of convenient parking is a frequently
|
||
cited issue. Currently there are no parking structures in the Tazewell area.
|
||
Because of the high cost of constructing parking decks - nearly four times
|
||
the cost of surface parking - these facilities will largely remain an element
|
||
of market demand. In some cases, public financing of parking structures
|
||
could prove feasible in the high-density area adjoining the Courthhouse
|
||
complex. This area presently lacks sufficient on- and off-street spaces to
|
||
serve courthouse customers and employees. A joint study between the
|
||
Town and County should be commissioned to identify opportunities for
|
||
additional parking in the downtown area to alleviate potential problems.
|
||
|
||
As a general rule, future parking facilities in the downtown area should be
|
||
located on supporting streets and not on Main Street. Large structures or
|
||
expanses of asphalt can create gaps in the traditional street frontage and
|
||
dead zones between more active land uses. When such a location is
|
||
unavoidable, landscaping , low walls, fences or facades that reflect the
|
||
|
||
© Street. Construct Park and Ride lot on Fairground Road at the
|
||
interchange.
|
||
|
||
Add curb and gutter, sidewalks and drainage structures along Fincastle
|
||
|
||
Turnpike from its intersection with Market Street north to the
|
||
corporate limits.
|
||
|
||
® Add curb and gutter, sidewalks and drainagestructures along
|
||
Maplewood Avenue from Carline Avenue to Bulldog Lane.
|
||
|
||
The above referenced improvements are illustrated on the Transportation
|
||
Map on the following page.
|
||
|
||
PARKING FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
DOWNTOWN PARKING
|
||
|
||
Parking facilities in the downtown Tazewell area include on-street parking
|
||
and surface parking lots at most public buildings and businesses. The Town
|
||
‘and County also provide a variety of parking facilities for public use, including
|
||
paved parking lots at the rear of the Courthouse/Administration Building
|
||
and the County Library. All of these lots are well maintained
|
||
|
||
At present, on-street parking in Tazewell is entirely unmetered. Downtown
|
||
parking remains restricted to two-hour periods on Main Street. This helps
|
||
to maximize the availability of spaces for short-term users, such as shoppers,
|
||
tourists and patrons of the downtown area. Long term users, such as
|
||
downtown employees, are encouraged to park on private lots to the side or
|
||
rear of their buildings,
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS
|
||
|
||
In some sections of downtown, the lack of convenient parking isa frequently
|
||
cited issue. Currently there are no parking structures in the Tazewell area.
|
||
Because of the high cost of constructing parking decks - nearly four times
|
||
the cost of surface parking - these facilities will largely remain an element
|
||
‘of market demand. In some cases, public financing of parking structures
|
||
could prove feasible in the high-density area adjoining the Courthouse
|
||
‘complex. This area presently lacks sufficient on- and off-street spaces to
|
||
serve courthouse customers and employees. A joint study between the
|
||
‘Town and County should be commissioned to identify opportunities for
|
||
additional parking in the downtown area to alleviate potential problems.
|
||
|
||
As a general rule, future parking facilities in the downtown area should be
|
||
located on supporting streets and not on Main Street. Large structures or
|
||
expanses of asphalt can create gaps in the traditional street frontage and
|
||
dead zones between more active land uses. When such a location is
|
||
unavoidable, landscaping, low walls, fences or facades that reflect the
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 108
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 109
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
surrounding architectural character should be provided along the street.
|
||
Even when surface lots are located on supporting streets, low perimeter
|
||
landscaping or structural materials should be employed to soften edges
|
||
adjacent to the street. Parking access and visibility can best be promoted
|
||
through appropriate way-finding signage.
|
||
|
||
COMMUTER PARKING Transportation to work is an important transportation issue for Tazewell
|
||
workers, and the need for commuter parking is on the rise as increased
|
||
numbers of residents commute outside of the County and the State to
|
||
employment opportunities. In 2013, approximately 15% of Town residents
|
||
and 17% of County residents worked outside of Virginia. Many workers are
|
||
willing to travel over 50 miles one way to work. Ride sharing is thus an
|
||
important and growing part or the area’s transportation need. This is
|
||
particularly true given the increasing costs of gasoline and diesel fuel for the
|
||
foreseeable future.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS Development of parking lots to accommodate ride-sharing commuters should
|
||
be considered by the Town and County. With the limited amount of
|
||
designated commuter parking available, those in need of such facilities are
|
||
using shopping centers and other centrally located parking lots. This
|
||
potentially creates a condition where parking spaces are being used by
|
||
commuters rather than by customers and business employees. To remedy
|
||
this problem, park and ride lots should be developed at one or more of the
|
||
US 19/460 interchanges within the Town. Standards for location, size,
|
||
surrounding land uses and access should be created.
|
||
|
||
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Pedestrian facilities are discussed briefly here, within the context of the
|
||
downtown environment. This is the dominant area of pedestrian activity
|
||
within the town. A more wide-ranging discussion of alternative transportation
|
||
is presented under the Trail and Greenway Plan.,
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
surrounding architectural character should be provided along the street.
|
||
Even when surface lots are located on supporting streets, low perimeter
|
||
landscaping or structural materials should be employed to soften edges
|
||
adjacent to the street. Parking access and visibility can best be promoted
|
||
through appropriate way-finding signage.
|
||
|
||
COMMUTER PARKING
|
||
|
||
Transportation to work is an important transportation issue for Tazewell
|
||
workers, and the need for commuter parkingis on the rise as increased
|
||
numbers of residents commute outside of the County and the State to
|
||
‘employment opportunities. In 2013, approximately 15% of Town residents
|
||
and 17% of County residents worked outside of Virginia. Many workers are
|
||
willing to travel over 50 miles one way to work. Ride sharing is thus an
|
||
important and growing part or the area'stransportation need. This is
|
||
particularly true given the increasing costs of gasoline and diesel fuel for the
|
||
foreseeable future.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE NEEDS
|
||
|
||
Development of parking lots to accommodate ride-sharing commuters should
|
||
be considered by the Town and County. With the limited amount of
|
||
designated commuter parking available, those in need of such facilities are
|
||
using shopping centers and other centrally located parking lots. This
|
||
potentially creates a condition where parking spaces are being used by
|
||
‘commuters rather than by customers and business employees. To remedy
|
||
this problem, park and ride lots should be developed at one or more of the
|
||
US 19/460 interchanges within the Town. Standards for location, size,
|
||
surrounding land uses and access should be created.
|
||
|
||
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
|
||
|
||
Pedestrian facilities are discussed briefly here, within the context of the
|
||
downtown environment. This is the dominant area of pedestrian activity
|
||
within the town. Amore wide-ranging discussion of alternative transportation
|
||
is presented under the Trail and Greenway Plan.,
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 109
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 109
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
In recent years, several factors have been spurring demand for a more pedestrian-friendly environment in
|
||
Tazewell. Historically, walking has been the primary form of transportation for three basic groups: children,
|
||
elderly citizens who are unable to drive, and those residents who cannot afford to own or operate a car.
|
||
There is also a fourth segment of the population which is ever increasing , that uses sidewalks for health and
|
||
fitness related activities.
|
||
|
||
110
|
||
|
||
In recent years, several factors have been spurring demand for a more pedestrian-friendly environment in
|
||
Tazewell. Historically, walking has been the primary form of transportation for three basic groups: children,
|
||
elderly citizens who are unable to drive, and those residents who cannot afford to own or operatea car.
|
||
Thereis also a fourth segment of the population which is ever increasing, that uses sidewalks for health and
|
||
|
||
fitness related activities.
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 110
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TRAFFIC VOLUMES & PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
'---- 3,500
|
||
4,500 (5,450) ----
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
# AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC (AADT)
|
||
|
||
TOWN PRIORITY PROJECTS-2020 PLAN
|
||
VDOT 2020 PLAN IMPROVEMENTS
|
||
SIX-YEAR PLAN IMPROVEMENT
|
||
THOROUGHFARE- NO IMPROVEMENTS
|
||
|
||
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
|
||
NORTH
|
||
|
||
TRAFFIC VOLUMES &
|
||
PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA
|
||
|
||
8,440
|
||
(10,210)
|
||
|
||
=== 3,500
|
||
|
||
LEGEND
|
||
# AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC (AADT)
|
||
— TOWN PRIORITY PROJECTS-2020 PLAN
|
||
— VDOT 2020 PLAN IMPROVEMENTS
|
||
“SIX-YEAR PLAN IMPROVEMENT
|
||
|
||
— THOROUGHFARE- NO IMPROVEMENTS.
|
||
OO INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 111
|
||
|
||
|
||
The following project is for the Market Street and East Riverside intersection. As of September 2,2015 the Town
|
||
of Tazewell has sent a request to the Virginia Department of Transportation for consideration on the update this intersection. This project will fall into the one to five year plan of consideration.FOR USE IN PRE-SCOPING
|
||
AND SCOPING CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ITEM Unit Quantity Unit Price Amount
|
||
MOBILIZATION LS 1 $72,488 $72,488
|
||
CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING LS 1 $14,000 $14,000 GRADING ITEMS
|
||
CLEARING AND GRUBBING ACRE 0 $20,000 $9,917
|
||
REGULAR EXCAVATION CY 1778 $17 $30,222
|
||
BORROW EXCAVATION CY 0 $15 $0
|
||
UNSUITABLE MAT'1. (paid as Regular Excav.) CY 0 $17 $0
|
||
BACKFILL STONE (NO.1) FOR UNSUITABLE MATL. AREAS TONS 0 $20 $0
|
||
DRY RIPRAP TONS 0 $40 $0
|
||
Sub-Total $40,140
|
||
Grading Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $2,007 DRAINAGE ITEMS
|
||
CONCRETE BOX CULVERT LS 1 $0 $0
|
||
PIPES UNDER 36" LF 150 $125 $18,750
|
||
PIPES OVER 36" LF 200 $250 $50,000
|
||
END WALLS FOR PIPES OVER 36" EA 2 $300 $600
|
||
DROP INLETS EA 4 $4,000 $16,000
|
||
CURB AND GUTTER LF 1600 $35 $56,000
|
||
Sub-Total $141,350
|
||
Drainage Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $7,068
|
||
|
||
PAVEMENT ITEMS
|
||
SURFACE COURSE TONS 161 $110 $17,747
|
||
INTERMEDIATE COURSE TONS 225 $100 $22,489
|
||
BASE COURSE TONS 675 $90 $60,720
|
||
SUBBASE COURSE TONS 660 $20 $13,200
|
||
No.1 STONE TOMS 0 $25 $0
|
||
Sub-Total $114,156
|
||
Pavement Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $5,708
|
||
|
||
INCIDENTAL ITEMS
|
||
RETAINING WALLS (CONC.) CY 0 $400 $0
|
||
RURAL PRIVATE ENTRANCE EA 0 $2,000 $0
|
||
URBAN PRIVATE ENTRANCE EA 0 $5,000 $0
|
||
COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE EA 0 $10,000 $0
|
||
Sub-Total $0
|
||
Incidental Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $0 PROTECTIVE ITEMS
|
||
MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC (LUMP SUM) LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
|
||
FIELD OFFICE MO 0 $2,000 $0
|
||
SIDEWALK SY 222 $90 $20,000
|
||
Sub-Total $170,000
|
||
|
||
Protective Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $8,500
|
||
EROSION CONTROL
|
||
|
||
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY EA 1 $0 $0
|
||
SEEDING LB 300 $15 $4,500
|
||
TEMP. SILT FENCE LF 1600 $4 $6,400
|
||
CHECK DAMS TY. I OR II EA 16 $500 $8,000
|
||
|
||
“The following project is forthe Market Street and East Riverside intersection. As of September 2,2015 the Town
|
||
of Tazewell has sent a request tothe Virginia Department of Transportation for consideration on the update this
|
||
intersection. This project wil fll nto the one to five year plan of consideration. FOR USE IN PRE-SCOPING
|
||
‘AND SCOPING CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES
|
||
|
||
TEM Unit_[ Quantity] Unit Price “Amount
|
||
MOBILIZATION ts 1_| $72,488 $72,488
|
||
[CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING Ls 1 | $14,000 $14,000
|
||
‘GRADING ITEMS
|
||
[CLEARING AND GRUBBING AGRE[ 0 | $20,000 $0,917
|
||
REGULAR EXCAVATION. cy | ave | si7 $30,222
|
||
BORROW EXCAVATION cy 0 $15 $0
|
||
UNSUITABLE MAT". (paid as Regular Excav.) cy 0 SIT $0
|
||
BACKFILL STONE (NO.1) FOR UNSUITABLE MATL. AREAS | TONS | 0 $20 $0
|
||
DRY RIPRAP TONS | $40 $0
|
||
[Sub-Total $40,140
|
||
[Grading items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $2,007
|
||
DRAINAGE ITEMS
|
||
[CONCRETE BOX CULVERT is 7 30 50
|
||
PIPES UNDER 36° LF | 450 [$125 $18,750
|
||
PIPES OVER 36" LF | 200 [$250 $50,000
|
||
END WALLS FOR PIPES OVER 36” EA 2 $300 $600
|
||
DROP INLETS EA 4 $4,000 $16,000
|
||
[CURB AND GUTTER LF | ie00 | $35 $56,000
|
||
[Sub-Total $141,350
|
||
Drainage tems Contingency (XX) 5.00 $7,068
|
||
PAVEMENT ITEMS.
|
||
[SURFACE COURSE TONS | 164 $110 $47,747
|
||
INTERMEDIATE COURSE TONS | 225 | $100 $22,489
|
||
BASE COURSE TONS | 675 $90 $60,720
|
||
|SUBBASE COURSE TONS | 660 $20 $13.200
|
||
No.1 STONE Toms| 0 $25 80
|
||
[Sub-Total 3114, 156
|
||
[Pavement Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $5,708
|
||
INCIDENTAL ITEMS
|
||
RETAINING WALLS (CONC) cy[ 0 $400 30
|
||
RURAL PRIVATE ENTRANCE EA | 0 $2,000 $0
|
||
URBAN PRIVATE ENTRANCE EA] 0 $5,000 30
|
||
[COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE EA| 0 | $10,000 $0
|
||
[Sub-Total $0
|
||
Incidental Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 30
|
||
PROTECTIVE ITEMS
|
||
MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC (LUMP SUM) ts 1_| $150,000 $150,000
|
||
FIELD OFFICE mo | $2,000 30
|
||
‘SIDEWALK sy |_223 $90 $20,000
|
||
[Sub-Total $170,000
|
||
Protective tems Contingency (XX) 5.00 $8,500
|
||
EROSION CONTROL
|
||
[STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY EA 7 $0 50
|
||
‘SEEDING te | 300 315 $4,500
|
||
TEMP. SILT FENCE LF | i600 $4 ‘$6,400
|
||
[CHECK DAMS TY. 1 OR I EA | 16 $500 ‘$8,000
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
Page 111
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 112
|
||
|
||
Sub-Total $18,900
|
||
E&S Control Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $945
|
||
|
||
UTILITIES
|
||
BELOW GROUND UTILITIES (LUMP SUM $$$$) LF 1000 $75 $75,000
|
||
Sub-Total $75,000
|
||
Right of Way Contingency (XX) 5.00 $3,750
|
||
|
||
TRAFFIC AND SAFETY
|
||
PERMANENT SIGNAL (LUMP SUM) EA 1 $300,000 $300,000
|
||
PAVEMENT MARKINGS (IF APPLICABLE) LF 3200 $4 $12,800
|
||
GUARDRAIL GR-2 LF 0 $25 $0
|
||
END TREATMENT GR-9 EA 0 $2,500 $0
|
||
GR-FOA'S IF BRIDGE IS ON PROJECT EA 0 $2,000 $0
|
||
Sub-Total $312,800
|
||
Traffic Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $15,640
|
||
|
||
BRIDGE
|
||
NS BRIDGE (LUMP SUM $) (USE $300 PER S.F.) SF 0 $300 $0
|
||
DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BRIDGE LS 0 $18 $0
|
||
Sub-Total $0
|
||
Bridge Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $0
|
||
|
||
STREAMIWETLAND MITIGATION THAT IS INCLUDED IN CONSTRUCTION
|
||
Stream Mitigation LF 0 $700 $0
|
||
Wetland Mitigation Acre 0 $75,000 $0
|
||
|
||
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS NOT IN SPREADSHEET CAN BE ADDED HERE
|
||
Overlay TONS 250 110 $27,500
|
||
$0
|
||
$0
|
||
$0
|
||
$0
|
||
|
||
|
||
Contingency Total g '"!II $43,617
|
||
Mobilization $72,488
|
||
Construction Survey $14,000
|
||
Sub-Total $899,845
|
||
Total ~ - $1,029,951
|
||
|
||
CEI & CONTIGENCY
|
||
CEI OF AT LEAST 20 AS A LUMP SUM ITEM LS 1 20.00 $205,990
|
||
PROJECT CONTINGENCY Tier I 5 $44,992
|
||
|
||
GRAND TOTAL $1,380,000
|
||
|
||
Summary Notes
|
||
Contingency can be adjusted based on your comfort level with item quantity
|
||
Unit prices can be adjusted. Use current unit prices as a guide
|
||
CEI can be adjusted
|
||
Add any additional items that are important to the estimate in Misc.
|
||
Section
|
||
All items in "green" are locked
|
||
PE or RW cost is not included in this estimate
|
||
Cells with RED tabs include comments for clarifications
|
||
|
||
|
||
[Sub-Total $18,900
|
||
E&S Control Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $045,
|
||
UTILITIES
|
||
(BELOW GROUND UTILITIES (LUMP SUM $388) tr | i000 [$75 $75,000
|
||
[Sub-Total $75,000
|
||
Right of Way Contingency (XX) 5.00 $3,750
|
||
TRAFFIC AND SAFETY
|
||
PERMANENT SIGNAL (LUMP SUM) EA $300,000 $300,000
|
||
PAVEMENT MARKINGS (IF APPLICABLE) LF $4 $12,800
|
||
(GUARDRAIL GR-2 uF 325 $0
|
||
END TREATMENT GR-9 EA $2,500 30.
|
||
[GR-FOA'S IF BRIDGE IS ON PROJECT EA $2,000 $0
|
||
[Sub-Total $512,800
|
||
[Traffic Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 $15,640
|
||
BRIDGE
|
||
NS BRIDGE (LUMP SUM S) (USE $300 PER SF) SF $300 30
|
||
DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BRIDGE ts. $18 $0
|
||
[Sub-Total $0
|
||
Bridge Items Contingency (XX) 5.00 30.
|
||
‘STREAMIWETLAND MITIGATION THAT IS INCLUDED IN CONSTRUCTION
|
||
‘Stream Mitigation LF $700 30
|
||
\Wetland Mitigation Acre $75,000 $0
|
||
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS NOT IN SPREADSHEET CAN BE ADDED HERE
|
||
Overlay TONS | 250 110 $27,500
|
||
|
||
$0
|
||
|
||
$0
|
||
|
||
$0
|
||
|
||
$0
|
||
[Contingency Total o = 43.617
|
||
[Mobilization $72,488
|
||
[Construction Survey $14,000
|
||
[Sub-Total $899,845,
|
||
[Total E I $1,029,951
|
||
|
||
‘CEI & CONTIGENCY
|
||
CELOF ATLEAST 20 AS A LUMP SUM ITEM Lis] 7 | 2000 $205,990
|
||
PROJECT CONTINGENCY Tier 5 $44,992
|
||
GRAND TOTAL $1,380,000
|
||
|
||
Summary Notes
|
||
|
||
Contingency can be adjusted based on your comfort level with item quantity
|
||
Unit prices can be adjusted. Use current unit prices as a guide
|
||
|
||
CEI can be adjusted
|
||
|
||
‘Add any additional items that are important to the estimate in Misc.
|
||
|
||
Section
|
||
|
||
All items in “green” are locked
|
||
|
||
PE or RW cost is not included in this estimate
|
||
|
||
Cells with RED tabs include comments for clarifications
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 112
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 113
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FUTURE LAND USE +
|
||
TRANSPORTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 113
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 114
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION The Town of Tazewell Comprehensive Plan is a document that defines
|
||
how the community would like to develop and at the same time preserves
|
||
its rural character over the next two decades and how it will make progress
|
||
in managing potential future growth and development. In order for Tazewell
|
||
to realize its vision for the future it must have an effective implementation
|
||
strategy and the measures to fulfill the strategy that can be employed to
|
||
guide the town through the steps necessary to achieve that vision. The
|
||
Plan, therefore, identifies key topic areas whereby actions should be taken
|
||
to implement them. The general topic areas include:
|
||
|
||
•Land Use and Housing
|
||
|
||
|
||
•Economic Development
|
||
|
||
|
||
•Transportation/Mobility
|
||
|
||
|
||
•Natural and Historic Resources
|
||
|
||
|
||
•Community Facilities
|
||
|
||
|
||
•Recreation, Trails and Open Space
|
||
|
||
|
||
•Administration and Regional Cooperation
|
||
These seven key areas are restated in the following Implementation Matrix
|
||
and are accompanied by a list of recommended actions. Each recommended
|
||
action has a proposed time frame for completion. In addition, potential
|
||
funding sources are identified for the topic area. These recommended
|
||
actions are provided only as an initial step in the process of identifying
|
||
potential actions to be taken by the Town. They are not to be considered
|
||
as an exhaustive list of actions for implementation over the identified time
|
||
periods.
|
||
|
||
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
The Town of Tazewell Comprehensive Plan is a document that defines
|
||
how the community would like to develop and at the same time preserves
|
||
its rural character over the next two decades and how it will make progress
|
||
in managing potential future growth and development. In order for Tazewell
|
||
to realize its vision for the future it must have an effective implementation
|
||
strategy and the measures to fulfill the strategy that can be employed to
|
||
guide the town through the steps necessary to achieve that vision. The
|
||
Plan, therefore, identifies key topic areas whereby actions should be taken
|
||
to implementthem. The general topic areas include:
|
||
|
||
® Land Use and Housing
|
||
|
||
‘* Economic Development
|
||
|
||
© Transportation/Mobility
|
||
|
||
® Natural and Historic Resources
|
||
|
||
© Community Facilities
|
||
|
||
© Recreation, Trails and Open Space
|
||
|
||
© Administration and Regional Cooperation
|
||
|
||
These seven key areas are restated in the following Implementation Matrix
|
||
and are accompanied by list of recommended actions. Each recommended
|
||
action has a proposed time frame for completion. In addition, potential
|
||
funding sources are identified for the topic area. These recommended
|
||
actions are provided only as an initial step in the process of identifying
|
||
potential actions to be taken by the Town. They are not to be considered
|
||
as an exhaustive list of actions for implementation over the identified time
|
||
periods.
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 114
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 115
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
A. Land Use and Housing
|
||
1) Revise Tazewell’s zoning ordinance to
|
||
|
||
include additional overlay districts (i.e.
|
||
Parkway Overlay, Floodplain Overlay and
|
||
Entrance Corridor Overlay)
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
2) Revise zoning district boundaries to reflect
|
||
the Future Land Use Map.
|
||
|
||
x
|
||
|
||
3) Place limitations on the amount of residential
|
||
development permitted in the Town’s
|
||
Agriculture (A-1) and Business (B-2) zoning
|
||
districts.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
4) Seek funding from sources such as CDBG,
|
||
VHDA and Rural Development to rehabilitate
|
||
housing in neighborhoods identified as
|
||
Transitional or Deteriorating.
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
|
||
B. Economic Development
|
||
1) Establish a 501(c) 3 non-profit organization
|
||
|
||
to promote the Town’s “Main Street”
|
||
businesses.
|
||
• Develop an annual budget for the
|
||
|
||
organization
|
||
• Provide part-time staff to support the
|
||
|
||
organization
|
||
• Develop an economic database in order
|
||
|
||
that staff and business people can compile
|
||
marketing and development information
|
||
about Tazewell
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
2) Prepare market ing and promotional
|
||
information to be used to support the town’s
|
||
economic development activities.
|
||
|
||
• Develop a marketing brochure • Expand the town’s web site to include
|
||
informat ion about economic
|
||
development potential
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
4-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
A. Land Use and Housing
|
||
|
||
1) Revise Tazewell's zoning ordinance to x
|
||
include additional overlay districts (i.e.
|
||
Parkway Overlay, Floodplain Overlay and
|
||
Entrance Corridor Overlay)
|
||
|
||
2). Revise zoning district boundaries to reflect x
|
||
the Future Land Use Map.
|
||
|
||
3) Place limitations on the amount of residential x
|
||
development permitted in the Town's
|
||
Agriculture (A-1) and Business (8-2) zoning
|
||
districts.
|
||
|
||
4) Seek funding from sources such as CDBG,| y | y
|
||
VHDA and Rural Development to rehabilitate
|
||
housing in neighborhoods identified as
|
||
Transitional or Deteriorating
|
||
|
||
B. Economic Development
|
||
|
||
1) Establish a501(c) 3 non-profit organization |
|
||
to promote the Town's “Main Street”
|
||
businesses.
|
||
|
||
+ Develop an annual budget for the] C
|
||
organization
|
||
|
||
+ Provide part-time staffto support the} (,
|
||
organization
|
||
|
||
+ Develop an economic database in order
|
||
that staff and business people can compile
|
||
marketing and development information |
|
||
about Tazewell
|
||
|
||
2) Prepare marketing and promotional] ¢
|
||
information to be used to support the town's
|
||
economic development activities.
|
||
|
||
+ Develop a marketing brochure
|
||
|
||
+ Expand the town’s web site to include
|
||
information about economic
|
||
development potential
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 115 nd
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 116
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
• Undertake a campaign to encourage residents and workers in
|
||
the local trade area to patronize retai l, service and
|
||
professional businesses in Tazewell
|
||
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
3) Establish a business assistance program to work with the owners
|
||
and managers of retail and service businesses to retain them
|
||
in Tazewell
|
||
|
||
C C
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
4) Undertake a targeted business recruitment program to make
|
||
retai l and service businesses in other areas of the region aware
|
||
of the opportunities in Tazewell
|
||
|
||
C C
|
||
|
||
5) Undertake a targeted business recruitment program to attract
|
||
small to mid-sized manufacturing, research, professional
|
||
office and administrative firms.
|
||
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
6) W ork with the County Economic Development Author ity
|
||
to develop a business plan to identify the supply and
|
||
demand for various types of businesses.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
7) Develop an implementation schedule for inf rastructure,
|
||
ut i l i t ies and road improvements to
|
||
support commercial development along Riverside Drive
|
||
and Maplewood Lane
|
||
|
||
C
|
||
|
||
8) Encourage the redevelopment of commercially
|
||
zoned areas in North Tazewell
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
9) Continue to support festivals and community events that
|
||
|
||
promote tourism.
|
||
C C C
|
||
|
||
10) Apply for Affiliate Status as a Virginia “Main
|
||
Street” community
|
||
|
||
|
||
11) Establish a façade improvement loan/grant program for
|
||
|
||
commercial structures in the downtown historic district X
|
||
12) Apply for CDBG, ARC, Rural Development, Tobacco
|
||
|
||
Commission, VCEDA and other grants/loans that
|
||
provide funding for economic development initiatives
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
+ Undertake a campaign to encourage residents and workers in
|
||
the local trade area to patronize retail, service and
|
||
professional businesses in Tazewell Cc Cc Cc
|
||
3) Establish a business assistance program to work with theowners| C | C
|
||
and managers of retail and service businesses to retain them
|
||
in Tazewell
|
||
4) Undertakea targeted business recruitment programto make| C | C
|
||
retail and servicebusinesses in other areas of the region aware
|
||
of the opportunities in Tazewell
|
||
5) Undertakea targeted business recruitment program to attract
|
||
small to mid-sized manufacturing, research, professional! C| C
|
||
office and administrative firms.
|
||
6) Work with the County EconomicDevelopment Authority
|
||
to develop a business plan to identify the supply and
|
||
demand for various types of businesses.
|
||
IC
|
||
7) Develop an implementation schedule for infrastructure,
|
||
utilities and roadimprovements to Cc
|
||
support commercialdevelopment along Riverside Drive
|
||
and Maplewood Lane
|
||
8) Encourage the redevelopment ofcommercially x
|
||
zoned areas in North Tazewell
|
||
9) Continue to support festivals and community events that Cc Cc Cc
|
||
promote tourism
|
||
10) Apply for Affiliate Status as.a Virginia "Main
|
||
Street’ community
|
||
14) Establish a facade improvement loan/grant program for]
|
||
‘commercial structures in the downtown historic district
|
||
12) Apply for CDBG, ARC, Rural Development, Tobacco! Xx | Xx
|
||
Commission, VCEDAand other grants/loans that
|
||
provide funding foreconomic development initiatives
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 116
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 117
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
C. Transportation/Mobility
|
||
1) Urban Roads • Implement the sidewalk, curb & gutter
|
||
|
||
and drainage improvements along
|
||
Maplewood Lane from Carline Avenue
|
||
to Bull Dog Lane identified in the 2004-
|
||
2009 Six-Year Improvement Program • Implement improvements to Fairground
|
||
Road identified in the Tazewell 2020
|
||
Transportation Plan • Where possible, within existing rights-
|
||
of-way, urban roads should be widened
|
||
to include a 6-8 f t . shoulder for
|
||
pedestrian/ bicycle use.
|
||
|
||
c
|
||
|
||
x
|
||
|
||
c X
|
||
|
||
2) Other Transportat ion System
|
||
Recommendations • Create a proposed master road plan for
|
||
|
||
Tazewell, which would identify the
|
||
approximate locations of future local
|
||
roads, including local access roads that
|
||
could contribute to traffic reduction on
|
||
main roads.
|
||
|
||
• Establish bikeways on minor arterial
|
||
roads.
|
||
|
||
• The town should pursue options for
|
||
providing transportation alternatives, and
|
||
associated funding, for residents who are
|
||
disabled, elderly or otherwise limited.
|
||
|
||
• Explore with the County the possibility
|
||
of adding parking lots in the downtown
|
||
area.
|
||
|
||
• Evaluate potential locations for commuter
|
||
“park and ride” facilities
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
3) Utilize funding from VDOT, where feasible,
|
||
for improvements identified in the 2020
|
||
Transportation Plan
|
||
|
||
c c X
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
|
||
|
||
TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
C. Transportation/Mobility
|
||
|
||
1)
|
||
|
||
Urban Roads
|
||
|
||
+ Implement the sidewalk, curb & gutter
|
||
and drainage improvements along
|
||
Maplewood Lane from Carline Avenue
|
||
to Bull Dog Lane identified in the 2004-
|
||
2009 Six-Year Improvement Program
|
||
|
||
+ Implement improvements to Fairground
|
||
Road identified in the Tazewell 2020
|
||
Transportation Plan
|
||
|
||
+ Where possible, within existing rights-
|
||
of-way, urban roads should be widened
|
||
to include a 6-8 ft. shoulder for
|
||
pedestrian’ bicycle use.
|
||
|
||
2)
|
||
|
||
Other Transportation System
|
||
Recommendations
|
||
|
||
+ Create a proposed master road plan for
|
||
Tazewell, which would identify the
|
||
approximate locations of future local
|
||
roads, including local access roads that
|
||
could contribute to traffic reduction on
|
||
main roads.
|
||
|
||
+ Establish bikeways on minor arterial
|
||
roads.
|
||
|
||
+ The town should pursue options for
|
||
providing transportation alternatives, and
|
||
associated funding, for residents who are
|
||
disabled, elderly or otherwise limited,
|
||
|
||
+ Explore with the County the possibility
|
||
of adding parking lots in the downtown
|
||
area.
|
||
|
||
+ Evaluate potential locations for commuter
|
||
“park andride” facilities
|
||
|
||
3)
|
||
|
||
Utilize funding from VDOT, where feasible,
|
||
for improvementsidentified in the 2020
|
||
Transportation Plan
|
||
|
||
Page 117
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 118
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10 D. Natural and Historic Resources
|
||
|
||
1) Establish a priority ranking system for
|
||
developing “greenways” and trails identified
|
||
in the Greenways Plan and initiate the
|
||
process of developing the highest ranked
|
||
greenways and trails.
|
||
|
||
• Work with property owners and the
|
||
private sector to involve them in the
|
||
process of developing greenways.
|
||
|
||
• Establish a funding source within the
|
||
town’s budget for greenways and trails
|
||
development.
|
||
|
||
• Seek additional sources of funding such
|
||
as: TEA- 21, the Virginia Outdoors Fund,
|
||
the Virginia Recreational Trails Fund and
|
||
the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
2) Initiate the process of adopting the Parkway
|
||
Overlay Zoning District
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
3) The town should establish a committee or
|
||
other town board that has responsibility for
|
||
oversight, monitoring and management of
|
||
natural resources in Tazewell . This
|
||
committee should prepare an open space
|
||
plan which includes the following
|
||
|
||
• Initiate discussions with property owners
|
||
of identified parcels in the Parkway
|
||
Overlay District to determine if they are
|
||
interested in identifying a strategy to
|
||
preserve their land.
|
||
|
||
• Identify options for preserving potential
|
||
conservat ion parcels such as
|
||
conservat ion easements, l im ited
|
||
subdivision development, or acquisition.
|
||
Certain parcels may be capable of
|
||
serving multiple needs for the town,
|
||
such as active recreation facilities or
|
||
future sites of community facilities, as
|
||
well as open space preservation.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
c= Completed
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
123-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
D. Natural and Historic Resources
|
||
|
||
1) Establish a priority ranking systemfor| X
|
||
developing “greenways” and trails identified
|
||
in the Greenways Plan and initiate the
|
||
process of developing the highestranked
|
||
greenways and trails.
|
||
|
||
+ Work with property owners and the] X
|
||
private sector to involve them in the
|
||
process of developing greenways.
|
||
|
||
+ Establish a funding source within the] X
|
||
town's budget for greenways and trails
|
||
development.
|
||
|
||
+ Seek additional sources of funding such! X | X
|
||
as: TEA- 21, the Virginia Outdoors Fund,
|
||
the Virginia Recreational Trails Fund and
|
||
the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
|
||
|
||
2) Initiate the process of adopting the Parkway | x
|
||
Overlay Zoning District
|
||
|
||
3) The town should establish a committee or} X
|
||
‘other town board that has responsibility for
|
||
oversight, monitoring and management of
|
||
natural resourcesin Tazewell. This
|
||
committee should prepare an open space]
|
||
plan which includes the following
|
||
|
||
+ Initiate discussions with property owners| yx
|
||
of identified parcelsin the Parkway
|
||
Overlay District to determine if they are
|
||
interested in identifying a strategy to
|
||
preserve their land.
|
||
|
||
+ Identify options for preserving potential] x
|
||
conservation parcels such as|
|
||
conservation easements, limited
|
||
subdivision development, or acquisition.
|
||
Certain parcels may be capable of
|
||
serving multiple needs for the town,
|
||
such as active recreation facilities or
|
||
future sites of community facilities, as,
|
||
well as open space preservation.
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
— Page 118
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 119
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10 • Consider retaining the services of a
|
||
|
||
professional land conservation specialist
|
||
to help develop preservation options for
|
||
individual properties and/or to act as an
|
||
intermediary on behalf of the town with
|
||
property owners. This position might be
|
||
fil led by town, county or regional
|
||
personnel on an interim basis to ensure
|
||
adequate support for conservation
|
||
efforts.
|
||
|
||
• Establish a dedicated funding source
|
||
within the municipal budget for open
|
||
space preservation.
|
||
|
||
• Integrate the private sector into the
|
||
town’s open space planning efforts
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
x
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
4) Revise the zoning and subdivision regulations to
|
||
ensure that future development on
|
||
steeper slopes, particularly in the vicinity of
|
||
the Clinch River, is done in accordance with
|
||
Best Management Practices (BMPs) in order
|
||
to minimize impacts on surface waters and
|
||
adjoining properties.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
5) Expand inter-governmental cooperation to
|
||
include protection of the Clinch River and
|
||
its associated watershed that crosses
|
||
municipal boundaries. The purpose of this
|
||
would be to establish a structured process
|
||
that would ensure that resource protection
|
||
in Tazewell is comparable to the County and
|
||
other towns downstream.
|
||
|
||
• Identify appropriate board/committee to
|
||
conduct inter-governmental meetings.
|
||
|
||
• Ensure comparable regulatory protection
|
||
of shared water resources.
|
||
|
||
• Develop joint goals/act ions for
|
||
consideration by all municipalities
|
||
|
||
• Work with the State Department of
|
||
Environmental Quality and the TVA to
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
c
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
4-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
+ Consider retaining the services of a
|
||
professional land conservation specialist
|
||
to help develop preservation options for
|
||
individual properties and/or to act as an
|
||
intermediary on behalf of the town with
|
||
property owners. This position might be
|
||
filled by town, county or regional
|
||
personnel on an interim basis to ensure x
|
||
adequate support for conservation
|
||
efforts. x
|
||
|
||
+ Establish a dedicated funding source
|
||
within the municipal budget for open
|
||
space preservation. x
|
||
|
||
+ Integrate the private sector into the
|
||
town's open space planning efforts
|
||
|
||
4) Revise the zoning and subdivision regulations to x
|
||
ensure that future development on
|
||
steeper slopes, particularly in the vicinity of
|
||
the Clinch River, is done in accordance with
|
||
Best Management Practices (BMPs) in order
|
||
to minimize impacts on surface waters and
|
||
adjoining properties.
|
||
|
||
5) Expand inter-governmental cooperation to x
|
||
include protection of the Clinch River and
|
||
its associated watershed that crosses
|
||
municipal boundaries. The purpose of this
|
||
would be to establish a structured process
|
||
that would ensure that resource protection
|
||
in Tazewell is comparable to the County and
|
||
other towns downstream.
|
||
|
||
+ Identify appropriate board/committee to |X
|
||
conduct inter-governmental meetings.
|
||
|
||
+ Ensure comparable regulatory protection
|
||
of shared water resources.
|
||
|
||
+ Develop joint goals/actions for | x
|
||
consideration by all municipalities
|
||
|
||
+ Work with the State Department of | c
|
||
Environmental Quality and the TVAto
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 119 nd
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 120
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
ensure water quality monitoring
|
||
is performed on a regular basis.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
6) Develop with the County regu latory
|
||
standards to ensure the adequate
|
||
treatment of storm water runoff from
|
||
impervious surfaces into water courses,
|
||
wetlands, or surface water bodies.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
7) Initiate the process of defining additional
|
||
historic district(s) to ensure protection of the
|
||
town’s culturally significant historic
|
||
structures and sites. This process
|
||
should include compi l ing a suitable
|
||
inventory and documentation of historic
|
||
structures
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
|
||
8) Establish an Architectural Review Board and
|
||
develop design guidelines for the Historic
|
||
District
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
9) Establish a network of markers and plaques
|
||
for the town’s historic and cultural sites to
|
||
increase awareness of the significance of
|
||
these resources. Develop/promote a
|
||
walking/driving tour of these sites that could
|
||
be integrated into other trail systems within
|
||
the town.
|
||
|
||
c
|
||
|
||
10) Apply for funding from DHR to
|
||
conduct surveys of historic structures.
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
|
||
E. Community Facilities
|
||
1) Tazewell should use intergovernmental
|
||
|
||
collaborations as a cost-effective approach
|
||
to providing municipal services and
|
||
facilities whenever practical. Explore the
|
||
possibility of turning over the
|
||
operat ion of the wastewater treatment
|
||
facility to the County Public Service
|
||
Authority.
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
|
||
2) Ensure that al l proposed upgrades or
|
||
expansion of municipal facilities and utility
|
||
systems in Tazewel l support planned
|
||
development in defined areas and do not
|
||
|
||
c
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
c= Completed
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
ensure water quality monitoring
|
||
isperformed on a regular basis.
|
||
|
||
6) Develop with the County regulatory] X
|
||
standards to ensure the adequate
|
||
treatment of storm water runoff from
|
||
impervioussurfaces into water courses,
|
||
wetlands, or surface water bodies.
|
||
|
||
7) Initiate the process of defining additional] x | x
|
||
historic district(s)to ensure protection of the
|
||
town’s culturally significant _ historic
|
||
structures and sites. This process
|
||
should include compiling a suitable
|
||
inventory anddocumentation of historic
|
||
|
||
8) Establishan Architectural ReviewBoardand|
|
||
develop design guidelines for the Historic
|
||
District
|
||
|
||
9) Establish anetwork of markers and plaques}
|
||
for the town's historic and cultural sites to
|
||
increase awareness of the significance of
|
||
these resources. Develop/promote a
|
||
walking/driving tour of these sites that could
|
||
be integrated into other trail systems within
|
||
the town.
|
||
|
||
10) Apply for funding from DHR to x | x
|
||
conduct surveys of historic structures.
|
||
|
||
E, Community Facilities
|
||
|
||
1) Tazewell should use intergovernmental| X x
|
||
collaborations as a cost-effective approach
|
||
to providing municipal services and
|
||
facilities whenever practical. Explore the
|
||
possibility of turning over the
|
||
operation of the wastewater treatment
|
||
facility to the County Public Service
|
||
|
||
2) Ensure that all proposed upgrades or c
|
||
expansion of municipal facilities and utility
|
||
systems in Tazewell support planned
|
||
developmentin defined areas and do not
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 120
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 121
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10 encourage growth in port ions of the
|
||
|
||
community that are not planned to receive
|
||
future development.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
3) Adopt and implement a Capita l
|
||
Improvements Plan (CIP) that includes
|
||
scheduled equipment purchase and
|
||
replacement, building upgrades and/or new
|
||
construction, land acquisition for the location
|
||
of future facilities, and the upgrading and
|
||
construct ion of roadways and other
|
||
transportation facilities. Major facilities /
|
||
equipment needs that should be addressed
|
||
in the CIP include the following.
|
||
|
||
• Upgrade the Public Works garage • Renovate/reuse the o ld County
|
||
Administration/Social Services Building • Upgrade the Wastewater Treatment
|
||
Facility • Establish a regular rotation and capital
|
||
funding for the purchase of
|
||
replacement firefighting equipment
|
||
|
||
• Purchase equipment for police patrol cars • Fund, where feasible, the improvements
|
||
identified in the 2020 Transportation Plan
|
||
and the Six-Year Plan
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
|
||
4) Prepare town staffing projections for three,
|
||
five and ten years into the future.
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
F. Recreation, Trails and Open Space
|
||
1) In order to support continued recreation
|
||
|
||
planning in the town a survey of residents
|
||
should be undertaken every three years to
|
||
identify recreational interests. This survey
|
||
should include a regional inventory of
|
||
available facilities and services in order to
|
||
promote an inter-municipal approach to
|
||
providing recreation services.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
|
||
|
||
TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
4-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
encourage growth in portions of the
|
||
community that are not planned to receive
|
||
future development.
|
||
|
||
3) Adopt and implement a Capital
|
||
Improvements Plan (CIP) that includes
|
||
scheduled equipment purchase and
|
||
replacement, building upgrades and/or new
|
||
construction, land acquisition for the location
|
||
of future facilities, and the upgrading and
|
||
construction of roadways and other
|
||
transportation facilities. Major facilities /
|
||
equipment needs that should be addressed
|
||
in the CIP include the following.
|
||
|
||
+ Upgrade the Public Works garage
|
||
|
||
+ Renovate/reuse the old County
|
||
Administration/Social Services Building
|
||
|
||
+ Upgrade the Wastewater Treatment
|
||
Facility
|
||
|
||
+ Establish a regular rotation and capital
|
||
funding for the purchase of
|
||
replacement firefighting equipment
|
||
|
||
= Purchase equipment for police patrol cars
|
||
|
||
+ Fund, where feasible, the improvements
|
||
identified in the 2020 Transportation Plan
|
||
and the Six-Year Plan
|
||
|
||
4) Prepare town staffing projections for three,
|
||
five and ten years into the future.
|
||
|
||
F. Recreation, Trails and Open Space
|
||
|
||
1) In order to support continued recreation
|
||
planning in the town a survey of residents
|
||
should be undertaken every three years to
|
||
identify recreational interests. This survey
|
||
should include a regional inventory of
|
||
available facilities and services in order to
|
||
promote an inter-municipal approach to
|
||
providing recreation services.
|
||
|
||
Page 121
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 122
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
2) Evaluate the potential for developing an
|
||
indoor spor ts faci l i ty in a vacant or
|
||
underutilized building near Lincolnshire Park.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
3) Acquire/reserve land for the potential
|
||
creation of future neighborhood parks or
|
||
playgrounds. These parcels, or portions of
|
||
parcels, should be reserved as part of the
|
||
subdiv is ion approval process and/or
|
||
purchased with funds set aside in a municipal
|
||
capital reserve fund. The locations of these
|
||
future facilities would ideally be located in
|
||
Planned Unit Development areas identified
|
||
on the Future Land Use Map. If not
|
||
developed as active recreation facilities,
|
||
these parcels should be sui tab le for
|
||
supporting the town’s overall open space
|
||
protection goals.
|
||
|
||
X X
|
||
|
||
G. Administrative and Regional Cooperation
|
||
1) Establ ish a Comprehensive Plan
|
||
|
||
Implementation Committee which would be
|
||
responsible for monitoring progress in making
|
||
changes recommended in the plan. The
|
||
responsibilities of this committee could
|
||
include the following.
|
||
|
||
• Issuing progress reports regarding the
|
||
success of implementing comprehensive
|
||
plan recommendations.
|
||
|
||
• Hold public meetings to solicit input
|
||
about planning and development issues
|
||
in Tazewell as they relate to the plan
|
||
implementation.
|
||
|
||
• Advice the Planning Commiss ion
|
||
concerning changes proposed to the
|
||
town’s land use regulations by the
|
||
comprehensive plan.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
2) Develop specific annual work plans for each
|
||
town board, committee and/or commission
|
||
based on the implementation strategy of the
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1235 6-10
|
||
2) Evaluate the potential for developing an x
|
||
indoor sports facility in a vacant or
|
||
underutilized building near Lincolnshire Park,
|
||
3) Acquire/reserve land for the potential x | x
|
||
|
||
creation of future neighborhood parks or
|
||
playgrounds. These parcels, or portions of
|
||
parcels, should be reserved as part of the
|
||
subdivision approval process and/or
|
||
purchased with funds set aside in a municipal
|
||
capital reserve fund. The locations of these
|
||
future facilities would ideally be located in
|
||
Planned Unit Development areas identified
|
||
on the Future Land Use Map. If not
|
||
developed as active recreation facilities,
|
||
these parcels should be suitable for
|
||
supporting the town's overall open space
|
||
protection goals.
|
||
|
||
G. Administrative and Regional Cooperation
|
||
|
||
1) Establish a Comprehensive Plan| X
|
||
Implementation Committee which would be
|
||
responsible for monitoring progress in making
|
||
changes recommended in the plan. The
|
||
responsibilities of this committee could
|
||
include the following.
|
||
|
||
+ Issuing progress reports regarding the
|
||
success of implementing comprehensive
|
||
plan recommendations.
|
||
|
||
+ Hold public meetings to solicit input
|
||
about planning and development issues
|
||
in Tazewellas they relate to the plan
|
||
implementation.
|
||
|
||
+ Advice the Planning Commission
|
||
concerning changes proposed to the
|
||
town’s land use regulations by the
|
||
comprehensive plan.
|
||
|
||
2) Develop specific annual work plans foreach} X
|
||
|
||
town board, committee and/or commission
|
||
based on the implementation strategy of the
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION|
|
||
Page 122
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 123
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
comprehensive plan. Use this work plan to
|
||
develop volunteer projects for Tazewell
|
||
residents which will introduce citizens to the
|
||
roles and responsibilities of these boards and
|
||
committees.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
3) Tazewell should use regional collaborations
|
||
as a cost-effective approach to providing
|
||
municipal services and facilities whenever
|
||
practical. This should include cooperative
|
||
purchasing agreements for the procurement
|
||
of equipment, materials, and services.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
4) Meet with the County to review proposed
|
||
zoning changes along Tazewell’s municipal
|
||
boundaries to determine their compatibility
|
||
with zoning in neighboring districts.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
5) Continue to promote and expand the working
|
||
relationships developed with the County on
|
||
issues of shared concern such as
|
||
transportation, municipal services, economic
|
||
development, and the protection of natural
|
||
resources that cross municipal boundaries.
|
||
|
||
X
|
||
|
||
|
||
LEGAL STATUS OF THE PLAN The legal foundation for the comprehensive plan is Title 15.2 of the Code
|
||
of Virginia. The state code addresses the procedures for comprehensive
|
||
plan implementation including the role of the Town Planning Commission,
|
||
the relationship of the zoning and subdivision ordinances to the plan and
|
||
their use in accomplishing the plan’s land use elements. In addition, Title
|
||
15.2 provide direction for capital improvements programming and presents
|
||
the procedures for coordination of government activities at all levels.
|
||
|
||
The following excerpt from Title 15.2, Code of Virginia, 1950 (as amended),
|
||
subsect ion 15.2-2224 suggests var ious methods for the p lan’s
|
||
implementation:
|
||
|
||
B. The comprehensive plan shall recommend methods of implementation
|
||
and shall include a current map of the area covered by the comprehensive
|
||
plan. Unless otherwise required by this chapter, the methods of implementation
|
||
may include but need not be limited to:
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
Legend
|
||
X=Proposed
|
||
|
||
C= Completed
|
||
|
||
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TIME PERIOD(YRS)
|
||
1-2 3-5 6-10
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
‘comprehensive plan. Use this work planto| X
|
||
develop volunteer projects for Tazewell
|
||
residents which will introduce citizens to the
|
||
roles and responsibilities of these boards and
|
||
committees.
|
||
|
||
3) Tazewell should use regional collaborations |
|
||
as a cost-effective approach to providing
|
||
municipal services and facilities whenever
|
||
practical. This should include cooperative
|
||
purchasing agreements for the procurement
|
||
of equipment, materials, and services.
|
||
|
||
4) Meet with the County to review proposed|
|
||
zoning changes along Tazewell's municipal
|
||
boundaries to determine their compatibility
|
||
with zoning in neighboring districts.
|
||
|
||
5) Continue to promote and expand the working]
|
||
relationships developed with the County on
|
||
issues of shared concern such as
|
||
transportation, municipal services, economic’
|
||
development, and the protection of natural
|
||
resources that cross municipal boundaries.
|
||
|
||
LEGAL STATUS OF THE PLAN
|
||
|
||
The legal foundation for the comprehensive plans Title 15.2 of the Code
|
||
of Virginia. The state code addresses the procedures for comprehensive
|
||
plan implementation including the role of the Town Planning Commission,
|
||
the relationship of the zoning and subdivision ordinances to the plan and
|
||
their use in accomplishing the plan's land use elements. In addition, Title
|
||
15.2 provide direction for capital improvements programming and presents
|
||
the procedures for coordination of government activities at all levels.
|
||
|
||
The following excerpt from Title 15.2, Code of Virginia, 1950 (as amended),
|
||
subsection 15.2-2224 suggests various methods for the plan's
|
||
implementation:
|
||
|
||
B. The comprehensive plan shall recommend methods of implementation
|
||
and shall include a current map of the area covered by the comprehensive
|
||
plan. Unless otherwise required by this chapter, the methods of implementation
|
||
may include but need not be limited to:
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 123
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 124
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
●An official map; ●A capital improvements program;
|
||
●A subdivision ordinance;
|
||
●A zoning ordinance and zoning district maps, and ●A mineral resource map. THE ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission is responsible for preparing the Comprehensive
|
||
Plan and advising the Town Council on related matters. The Planning
|
||
Commission should maintain a knowledge of the facts and interrelationships
|
||
of a broad range of subjects. Furthermore, the Commission must be able to
|
||
weigh the advantages and disadvantages of various possible courses of action.
|
||
|
||
The state planning and enabling statutes provide for general content of the
|
||
Plan and procedures for adoption. The Planning Commission is required to
|
||
give notice and hold a public hearing before recommending the Plan to the
|
||
Town Council for adoption. The Town Council must also give notice and
|
||
hold a public hearing before it adopts the Plan. For purposes of expediency,
|
||
the two bodies may also hold a joint public hearing in which both above
|
||
actions are undertaken.
|
||
|
||
PLANNING ASSISTANCE Routine administration and review of zoning and subdivision proposals,
|
||
periodic revision of the Comprehensive Plan, participation in funding programs
|
||
and special studies may require additional staff in the near future. Staff
|
||
services can also continue to be supplemented on an as-needed basis by
|
||
consultants and the Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission.
|
||
|
||
MAINTENANCE OF THE PLAN This Plan has been prepared for a twenty-year horizon (2005-2025), with
|
||
emphasis on the immediate decade ahead. The Plan is intended to serve in
|
||
a broad advisory capacity, for like the earlier plan, it cannot foresee all the
|
||
changes that will occur inevitably over time. In addition, the Plan is intended
|
||
to be flexible, and should not be considered exactly as presented as might be
|
||
implied by the detailed mapping and concept designs.
|
||
|
||
In accordance with state code, the Plan should be re-evaluated at least
|
||
once every five years by the local commission to determine whether it is
|
||
advisable to amend the plan. Significant new developments, such as state
|
||
highway proposals; location of a major new industry, shopping center, or
|
||
residential subdivisions; expansion of corporate boundaries or major public/
|
||
private uses; and other far-reaching developments should tr igger a r
|
||
e - evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan.
|
||
|
||
‘*An official map;
|
||
‘*A capital improvements program;
|
||
|
||
‘A subdivision ordinance;
|
||
|
||
‘*A zoning ordinance and zoning district maps, and
|
||
|
||
‘A mineral resource map.
|
||
|
||
THE ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
|
||
|
||
The Planning Commission is responsible for preparing the Comprehensive
|
||
Plan and advising the Town Council on related matters. The Planning
|
||
‘Commission should maintain a knowledge of the facts and interrelationships
|
||
of abroad range of subjects. Furthermore, the Commission must be able to
|
||
weigh the advantages and disadvantages of various possible courses of action.
|
||
|
||
The state planning and enabling statutes provide for general content of the
|
||
Plan and procedures for adoption. The Planning Commission is required to
|
||
give notice and hold a public hearing before recommending the Plan to the
|
||
‘Town Council for adoption. The Town Council must also give notice and
|
||
hold a public hearing before it adopts the Plan. For purposes of expediency,
|
||
the two bodies may also hold a joint public hearing in which both above
|
||
actions are undertaken
|
||
|
||
PLANNING ASSISTANCE
|
||
|
||
Routine administration and review of zoning and subdivision proposals,
|
||
Periodic revision of the Comprehensive Plan, participation in funding programs
|
||
and special studies may require additional staffin the near future. Staff
|
||
services can also continue to be supplemented on an as-needed basis by
|
||
consultants and the Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission.
|
||
|
||
MAINTENANCE OF THE PLAN
|
||
|
||
This Plan has been prepared for a twenty-year horizon (2005-2025), with
|
||
‘emphasis on the immediate decade ahead. The Plan is intended to serve in
|
||
a broad advisory capacity, for like the earlier plan, it cannot foresee all the
|
||
changes that will occur inevitably over time. In addition, the Plan is intended
|
||
to be flexible, and should not be considered exactly as presented as might be
|
||
implied by the detailed mapping and concept designs.
|
||
|
||
In accordance with state code, the Plan should be re-evaluated at least
|
||
once every five years by the local commission to determine whether it is
|
||
advisable to amend the plan. Significant new developments, such asstate
|
||
highway proposals; location of a major new industry, shopping center, or
|
||
residential subdivisions; expansion of corporate boundaries or major public!
|
||
private uses; and other far-reaching developments shouldtriggerar
|
||
e-evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION)
|
||
|
||
Page 124
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 125
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES Private property development and public improvement efforts can be
|
||
coordinated with the plan through the use of applicable regulatory measures:
|
||
zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations, building, housing and other codes.
|
||
An adopted Capital Improvement Program also provides a mechanism for
|
||
the local governing body to schedule public improvements in accordance
|
||
with the plan over both a five year period and on an annual basis.
|
||
|
||
The Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations for the Town of Tazewell
|
||
are intended to accompany this plan document under separate cover. Legal
|
||
enforcement is explained within the text of these regulations. The
|
||
comprehensive plan must be used as the reference by which zoning requests,
|
||
development proposals and the zoning and subdivision regulations are
|
||
reviewed for approval or disapproval. In relation to the Plan, zoning and
|
||
subdivision regulations are discussed further below. THE ZONING ORDINANCE Zoning is the legal means by which land use, lot sizes, building setbacks,
|
||
height, bulk and other related matters are controlled. The zoning ordinance
|
||
and zoning map are the primary tools for implementing the Land Use Plan
|
||
element of the Comprehensive Plan. While zoning enables all existing land
|
||
uses to be continued, it does provide methods for gradually phasing out
|
||
non-conforming land uses as they become obsolete or discontinued.
|
||
However, the primary purpose of the zoning ordinance is to regulate new
|
||
development.
|
||
|
||
The Tazewell zoning ordinance was updated in 1980. Since that time,
|
||
adjustments have been made to district regulations. Some of these changes
|
||
have been incremental in nature; other more comprehensive amendments
|
||
have also been enacted. Generally, these changes have been effective in
|
||
implementing the overall land use objectives of the Town, however some
|
||
additional revisions are needed to conform the ordinance more closely with
|
||
the adopted Plan and recent state enabling legislation. Therefore, subsequent
|
||
to the Plan’s adoption, it is recommended that proceedings begin to update
|
||
and further revise the Tazewell zoning ordinance, including changes to certain
|
||
district regulations and the zoning map.
|
||
|
||
Concurrent with preparation of the Plan was an initial review and set of
|
||
recommended revisions to the Tazewell Zoning Ordinance. These
|
||
recommendations are preliminary in nature and should undergo further study
|
||
as the Town updates and amends its zoning ordinance during an ensuing
|
||
time period.
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES
|
||
|
||
Private property development and public improvement efforts can be
|
||
coordinated with the plan through the use of applicable regulatory measures:
|
||
zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations, building, housing and other codes.
|
||
‘An adopted Capital Improvement Program also provides a mechanism for
|
||
the local governing body to schedule public improvements in accordance
|
||
with the plan over both a five year period and on an annual basis.
|
||
|
||
The Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations for the Town of Tazewell
|
||
are intended to accompany this plan document under separate cover. Legal
|
||
enforcement is explained within the text of these regulations. The
|
||
‘comprehensive plan must be used as the reference by which zoning requests,
|
||
development proposals and the zoning and subdivision regulations are
|
||
reviewed for approval or disapproval. In relation to the Plan, zoning and
|
||
subdivision regulations are discussed further below.
|
||
|
||
THE ZONING ORDINANCE
|
||
|
||
Zoning is the legal means by which land use, lot sizes, building setbacks,
|
||
height, bulk and other related matters are controlled. The zoning ordinance
|
||
and zoning mapare the primary tools for implementing the Land Use Plan
|
||
element of the Comprehensive Plan. While zoning enables all existing land
|
||
uses to be continued, it does provide methods for gradually phasing out
|
||
non-conforming land uses as they become obsolete or discontinued.
|
||
However, the primary purpose of the zoning ordinance is to regulate new
|
||
development.
|
||
|
||
The Tazewell zoning ordinance was updated in 1980. Since that time,
|
||
adjustments have been made to district regulations. Some of these changes
|
||
have been incremental in nature; other more comprehensive amendments
|
||
have also been enacted. Generally, these changes have been effective in
|
||
implementing the overall land use objectives of the Town, however some
|
||
additional revisions are needed to conform the ordinance more closely with
|
||
the adopted Plan and recent state enabling legislation. Therefore, subsequent
|
||
to the Plan's adoption, it is recommended that proceedings begin to update
|
||
and further revise the Tazewell zoning ordinance, including changes to certain
|
||
district regulations and the zoning map.
|
||
|
||
Concurrent with preparation of the Plan was an initial review and set of
|
||
recommended revisionsto the Tazewell Zoning Ordinance. These
|
||
recommendations are preliminary in nature and should undergo further study
|
||
as the Town updates and amends its zoning ordinance during an ensuing
|
||
time period.
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 125 —
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 126
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDED ZONING ORDINANCE REVISIONS: Residential Zoning Classifications - consider methods to further illustrate and
|
||
clarify basic design objectives for the R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 zoning districts.
|
||
Consider including diagrams to illustrate each district’s respective
|
||
requirements as to lot size, height standards and setback requirements.
|
||
Include uniform language to identify the purpose of the district, permitted
|
||
uses, uses permitted by special use permit, off-street parking standards and
|
||
landscaping and screening requirements.
|
||
|
||
Rural Residential District - consider adding a Rural Residential District to the
|
||
ordinance. The purpose of this district is to allow for certain agricultural
|
||
operations such as raising of crops, orchards, truck gardens, etc. and large
|
||
animals on a farm ten acres or more. Intensive agricultural operations such
|
||
as feedlots, poultry houses, hog farms, and dairy operations would not be
|
||
permitted unless Town Council approved a special use permit for them.
|
||
|
||
Commercial Zoning classifications - consider methods to illustrate and further
|
||
clarify design objectives set forth in the B-1 and B-2 zoning districts. Consider
|
||
including diagrams of basic regulatory elements.
|
||
|
||
Central Business District – consider adding a Central Business District to the
|
||
ordinance. The purpose of this district is to provide for an appropriate
|
||
variety of uses in the historic center for commercial, financial, governmental,
|
||
residential and cultural activities. High-density residential development
|
||
including housing on upper-floors of commercial buildings would be
|
||
permitted and off-street parking requirements would be minimal. Maximum
|
||
floor areas for commercial uses should be established in order to prevent
|
||
development of large-scale commercial uses in the historic downtown area.
|
||
|
||
Industrial Zoning Classifications – consider changing the M-1 General Industrial
|
||
District to a Limited Industrial District in order to prevent heavy manufacturing
|
||
uses from being permitted in proximity to residential districts.
|
||
|
||
Overlay Districts – In addition to the Historic Preservation Overlay District,
|
||
additional districts such as a Floodplain District, Parkway Overlay District,
|
||
Cluster Housing and Entrance Corridor District should be considered for
|
||
inclusion in the ordinance.
|
||
|
||
In addition to the above changes, other more general needs were identified
|
||
in the initial review. First, there is a need to clarify ordinance language,
|
||
intent and definitions in certain instances; and to resolve potentially conflicting
|
||
or confusing language in the ordinance. Secondly, there is a need to update
|
||
the Zoning Ordinance with regard to recent changes in state enabling
|
||
legislation, such as provisions related to manufactured homes and conditional
|
||
zoning . Finally, the ordinance should be made to conform more closely
|
||
with the adopted Plan. While simplicity and ease of use should be
|
||
|
||
PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDED ZONING ORDINANCE REVISIONS:
|
||
|
||
Residential Zoning Classifications - consider methods to further illustrate and
|
||
clarify basic design objectives for the R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 zoning districts.
|
||
Consider including diagrams to illustrate each district's respective
|
||
requirements as to lot size, height standards and setback requirements,
|
||
Include uniform language to identify the purpose of the district, permitted
|
||
uses, uses permitted by special use permit, off-street parking standards and
|
||
landscaping and screening requirements.
|
||
|
||
Rural Residential District - consider adding a Rural Residential District to the
|
||
ordinance. The purpose of this district is to allow for certain agricultural
|
||
operations. such as raising of crops, orchards, truck gardens, etc. and large
|
||
animals on a farm ten acres or more. Intensive agricultural operations such
|
||
as feediots, poultry houses, hog farms, and dairy operations would not be
|
||
permitted unless Town Council approved a special use permit for them
|
||
|
||
‘Commercial Zoning classifications - consider methods to illustrate and further
|
||
clarify design objectives set forth in the B-1 and B-2 zoning districts. Consider
|
||
including diagrams of basic regulatory elements.
|
||
|
||
Central Business District ~ consider adding a Central Business District to the
|
||
ordinance. The purpose of this district is to provide for an appropriate
|
||
variety of uses in the historic center for commercial, financial, governmental,
|
||
residential and cultural activities. High-density residential development
|
||
including housing on upper-floors of commercial buildings would be
|
||
permitted and off-street parking requirements would be minimal. Maximum
|
||
floor areas for commercial uses should be established in order to prevent
|
||
development of large-scale commercial uses in the historic downtown area
|
||
|
||
Industrial Zoning Classifications - consider changing the M-1 General Industrial
|
||
District to a Limited Industrial District in order to prevent heavy manufacturing
|
||
uses from being permitted in proximity to residential districts.
|
||
|
||
Overlay Districts — In addition to the Historic Preservation Overlay District,
|
||
additional districts such as a Floodplain District, Parkway Overlay District,
|
||
Cluster Housing and Entrance Corridor District should be considered for
|
||
inclusion in the ordinance.
|
||
|
||
In addition to the above changes, other more general needs were identified
|
||
in the initial review. First, there is a need to clarify ordinance language,
|
||
intent and definitions in certain instances; and to resolve potentially conflicting
|
||
‘or confusing language in the ordinance. Secondly, there is aneed to update
|
||
the Zoning Ordinance with regard to recent changes in state enabling
|
||
legislation, such as provisions related to manufactured homes and conditional
|
||
zoning. Finally, the ordinance should be made to conform more closely
|
||
with the adopted Plan. While simplicity and easeof use should be
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
— Page 126
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 127
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
maintained, further refinement or reorganization of the zoning district
|
||
classifications should be considered as part of the update process.
|
||
|
||
The Zoning District Map should be generally consistent with the Future
|
||
Land Use Plan. Within the overall pattern of land use established by the
|
||
Plan, there is nevertheless considerable room for variation between the
|
||
Plan and the zoning map. The land use categories need not be identical
|
||
and the one need not be amended every time the other is. The timing of
|
||
zoning changes to implement the Land Use Plan may vary and will require
|
||
judgment on a case-by-case basis by the Planning Commission and the Town
|
||
Council. In addition, the review and approval of individual projects by
|
||
special use or special exceptions should be based on guidelines provided by
|
||
the Plan, as well as the zoning ordinance and site conditions where change
|
||
is proposed. All individual amendments should be well documented by the
|
||
Town and advertised and publicly posted in accordance with state and local
|
||
requirements.
|
||
|
||
THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE The regulations of the subdivision ordinance are primarily concerned with
|
||
the platting of lots, the layout of streets, and the location of public spaces
|
||
and building of public improvements associated with the process of
|
||
subdividing land. In addition, they contribute to the keeping of clear and
|
||
accurate land records. These are matters deserving serious public
|
||
concern. Once established, a street is difficult to move, and when an
|
||
opportunity is missed for improved street locations or lot arrangements,
|
||
these opportunities are difficult or impossible to retrieve.
|
||
|
||
The Town updated its subdivision ordinance in 1991. Like the zoning
|
||
ordinance, the Tazewell subdivision ordinance has been incrementally revised
|
||
over the years. Hence, it also will need to be updated to reflect current
|
||
state enabling legislation, design standards and administrative procedures.
|
||
|
||
Concurrent with preparation of the Plan was an initial review of the Tazewell
|
||
Subdivision Ordinance. The recommendations below are both general and
|
||
preliminary in nature and should be studied further as the Town updates
|
||
and amends its other land use ordinances. Advisable changes to the
|
||
Subdivision Ordinance include but need not be limited to: addition of needed
|
||
cross references to Plan and zoning objectives; provisions to encourage more
|
||
innovative types of subdivision layout and design, such as planned unit
|
||
development (PUD) or clustering concepts; innovative incentive zoning
|
||
concepts, and general improvements to ordinance organization and clarity
|
||
of language. Updated subdivision regulations will be particularly important
|
||
in controlling the development of vacant residentially zoned land. For
|
||
instance, enhanced subdivision provisions would better enable dedication
|
||
|
||
maintained, further refinement or reorganization of the zoning district
|
||
classifications should be considered as part of the update process.
|
||
|
||
The Zoning District Map should be generally consistent with the Future
|
||
Land Use Plan. Within the overall pattern of land use established by the
|
||
Plan, there is nevertheless considerable room for variation between the
|
||
Plan and the zoning map. The land use categories need not be identical
|
||
and the one need not be amended every time the other is. The timing of
|
||
zoning changes to implementthe Land Use Plan may vary and will require
|
||
judgment on a case-by-case basis by the Planning Commission and the Town
|
||
Council. In addition, the review and approval of individual projects by
|
||
special use or special exceptions should be based on guidelines provided by
|
||
the Plan, as well as the zoning ordinance and site conditions where change
|
||
is proposed. All individual amendments should be well documented by the
|
||
‘Town and advertised and publicly posted in accordance with state and local
|
||
requirements.
|
||
|
||
THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
|
||
|
||
The regulations of the subdivision ordinance are primarily concerned with
|
||
the platting of lots, the layout of streets, and the location of public spaces
|
||
and building of public improvements associated with the process of
|
||
subdividing land. In addition, they contribute to the keeping of clear and
|
||
accurate land records. These are matters deserving serious public
|
||
concern. Once established, a street is difficult to move, and when an
|
||
‘opportunity is missed for improved street locations or lot arrangements,
|
||
these opportunities are difficult or impossible to retrieve.
|
||
|
||
‘The Town updated its subdivision ordinance in 1991. Like the zoning
|
||
ordinance, the Tazewell subdivision ordinance has been incrementally revised
|
||
over the years. Hence, it also will need to be updated to reflect current
|
||
state enabling legislation, design standards and administrative procedures.
|
||
|
||
Concurrent with preparation of the Plan was an initial review of the Tazewell
|
||
Subdivision Ordinance. The recommendations below are both general and
|
||
preliminary in nature and should be studied further as the Town updates
|
||
and amends its other land use ordinances. Advisable changes to the
|
||
Subdivision Ordinance include but need not be limited to: addition of needed
|
||
‘ross references to Plan and zoning objectives; provisions to encourage more
|
||
innovative types of subdivision layout and design, such as planned unit
|
||
development (PUD) or clustering concepts; innovative incentive zoning
|
||
concepts, and general improvements to ordinance organization and clarity
|
||
of language. Updated subdivision regulations will be particularly important
|
||
in controlling the development of vacant residentially zoned land. For
|
||
instance, enhanced subdivision provisions would better enable dedication
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 127 nd
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
ZONING DISTRICTS MAP
|
||
Town of Tazewell, Virginia
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 128
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
of public open space and other facilities in accordance with community
|
||
standards.
|
||
|
||
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAMMING A Capital Improvements Program (CIP) is a 5-year schedule of capital
|
||
expenditures by the Town. The program’s long-range plans are developed
|
||
in coordination with the Planning Commission with consideration of the
|
||
Town’s financial resources and other potential funding sources. Section
|
||
15.1-464 of the Virginia code permits a Planning Commission to prepare
|
||
and review annually a Capital Improvements Program based upon the
|
||
Comprehensive Plan and to do so either on its own initiative or at the
|
||
direction of the governing body.
|
||
|
||
While adoption and implementation of the Capital Improvements Program
|
||
is the responsibility of the Town Council and Town Manager, the Planning
|
||
Commission should provide additional advice and direction since it is the
|
||
body charged with preparing for the town’s future growth needs. Therefore,
|
||
the commission should become acquainted with local revenues and
|
||
expenditures, as well as recently adopted budgets. The Commission can
|
||
then meaningfully assist Town staff and Council in drafting a workable CIP
|
||
amortized over a five year period.
|
||
|
||
In the past, the Town of Tazewell has not utilized capital improvement
|
||
programming as part of its overall budget process. In accordance with state
|
||
code, future capital costs are estimated and scheduled over a five-year
|
||
projection period. This five-year summary will improve the Town’s ability to
|
||
anticipate financial problems, investigate alternative funding sources, and
|
||
postpone as necessary the execution of less urgent projects. The CIP also
|
||
will facilitate the phasing of costlier projects.
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL REVIEW AND COORDINATION Local town planning requires coordination with other adjacent jurisdictions,
|
||
Tazewell County, regional, Federal and State development proposals and
|
||
plans. Without coordination among these jurisdictions, the danger of planning
|
||
efforts being duplicated or conflicting will result in ineffective programs and
|
||
unnecessarily high development costs. The Cumberland Plateau Planning
|
||
District Commission is the most appropriate agency to provide regional
|
||
coordination and review of related plans.
|
||
|
||
LEVEL OF PROFESSIONAL PLANNING ASSISTANCE As important as the statutory mechanisms for plan implementation, however,
|
||
are the various funding and technical assistance programs available to local
|
||
governments. Planning assistance is presently provided to the Town of
|
||
Tazewell by the Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission and the
|
||
Tazewell County Planning Department. In addition, planning functions are
|
||
|
||
of public open space and other facilities in accordance with community
|
||
standards.
|
||
|
||
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAMMING
|
||
|
||
A Capital Improvements Program (CIP)is a 5-year schedule of capital
|
||
expenditures by the Town. The program's long-range plans are developed
|
||
in coordination with the Planning Commission with consideration of the
|
||
‘Town's financial resources and other potential funding sources. Section
|
||
15.1-464 of the Virginia code permits a Planning Commission to prepare
|
||
and review annually a Capital Improvements Program based upon the
|
||
Comprehensive Plan and to do so either on its own initiative or at the
|
||
direction of the governing body.
|
||
|
||
While adoption and implementation of the Capital Improvements Program
|
||
is the responsibility of the Town Council and Town Manager, the Planning
|
||
Commission should provide additional advice and direction since it is the
|
||
body charged with preparing for the town's future growth needs. Therefore,
|
||
the commission should become acquainted with local revenues and
|
||
expenditures, as well as recently adopted budgets. The Commission can
|
||
then meaningfully assist Town staff and Councilin drafting a workable CIP
|
||
amortized overa five year period.
|
||
|
||
In the past, the Town of Tazewell has not utilized capital improvement
|
||
programming as part of its overall budget process. In accordance with state
|
||
code, future capital costs are estimated and scheduled over a five-year
|
||
projection period. This five-year summary will improve the Town’s ability to
|
||
anticipate financial problems, investigate alternative funding sources, and
|
||
postpone as necessary the execution of less urgent projects. The CIP also
|
||
will facilitate the phasing of costlier projects.
|
||
|
||
REGIONAL REVIEW AND COORDINATION
|
||
|
||
Local town planning requires coordination with other adjacent jurisdictions,
|
||
Tazewell County, regional, Federal and State development proposals and
|
||
plans. Without coordination among these jurisdictions, the danger of planning
|
||
efforts being duplicated or conflicting will result in ineffective programs and
|
||
unnecessarily high development costs. The Cumberland Plateau Planning
|
||
District Commission is the most appropriate agency to provide regional
|
||
coordination and review of related plans.
|
||
|
||
LEVEL OF PROFESSIONAL PLANNING ASSISTANCE
|
||
|
||
‘As important as the statutory mechanisms for plan implementation, however,
|
||
are the various funding and technical assistance programs available to local
|
||
governments. Planning assistance is presently provided to the Town of
|
||
Tazewell by the Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission and the
|
||
Tazewell County Planning Department. In addition, planning functions are
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 128
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 129
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
often provided through the contracted services of private planning and
|
||
engineering consultants for special projects. Special needs which may warrant
|
||
additional planning and technical assistance in future years include the
|
||
following:
|
||
|
||
1. Maintenance of the Comprehensive Plan. Unforeseen changes in
|
||
development trends, population growth or effects of economic
|
||
changes resulting from new industrial or commercial development,
|
||
annexation or consolidation; all would have a major impact on long
|
||
range community planning which would need to be reflected in
|
||
the Comprehensive Plan.
|
||
|
||
2. As determined on a case-by-case basis and evolving from
|
||
recommendations contained in the Comprehensive Plan, there may
|
||
be a need for special studies, such as a detailed housing assessment,
|
||
an economic development study or long-range planning of utility
|
||
and community facilities. If undertaken, such special studies should
|
||
be used to expand on plan generalities and be treated as
|
||
amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
|
||
|
||
3. The review and administration of housing, building, zoning and
|
||
subdivision regulations and development proposals which affect
|
||
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan.
|
||
|
||
4. Assistance in determining the most appropriate State and Federal
|
||
assistance programs through which Tazewell may participate to aid
|
||
in implementing proposed community improvements.
|
||
|
||
5. Promotion of local citizen involvement in planning through the
|
||
conduct of public education programs on the Comprehensive Plan
|
||
and related planning processes.
|
||
|
||
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT The Town of Tazewell should seek to continually develop public awareness
|
||
of local planning efforts and issues. The overall intent should be to solicit
|
||
citizen participation in making planning decisions and to promote public
|
||
support for existing and future community improvement efforts.
|
||
|
||
In addition, local planning commission members should be encouraged to
|
||
attend Planning Commissioner Institute training sessions offered periodically
|
||
throughout the year by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community
|
||
Development (VDHCD). Educational materials are also available from
|
||
VDHCD which should be distributed to local planning commissioners.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
often provided through the contracted services of private planning and
|
||
ering consultants for special projects. Special needs which may warrant
|
||
additional planning and technical assistance in future years include the
|
||
following:
|
||
|
||
1. Maintenance of the Comprehensive Plan. Unforeseen changes in
|
||
development trends, population growth or effects of economic
|
||
changes resulting from new industrial or commercial development,
|
||
annexation or consolidation; all would have a major impact on long
|
||
range community planning which would need to be reflected in
|
||
the Comprehensive Plan.
|
||
|
||
2. Asdetermined on a case-by-case basis and evolving from
|
||
recommendations contained in the Comprehensive Plan, there may
|
||
bea need for special studies, such asa detailed housing assessment,
|
||
‘an economic development study or long-range planning of utility
|
||
and community facilities. If undertaken, such special studies should
|
||
be used to expand on plan generalities and be treated as
|
||
amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
|
||
|
||
3. The review and administration of housing, building, zoning and
|
||
subdivision regulations and development proposals which affect
|
||
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan.
|
||
|
||
4, Assistance in determining the most appropriate State and Federal
|
||
assistance programs through which Tazewell may participate to aid
|
||
in implementing proposed community improvements.
|
||
|
||
5. Promotion of local citizen involvement in planning through the
|
||
‘conduct of public education programs on the Comprehensive Plan
|
||
andrelated planning processes.
|
||
|
||
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
|
||
|
||
The Town of Tazewell should seek to continually develop public awareness
|
||
of local planning efforts and issues. The overall intent should be to solicit
|
||
citizen participation in making planning decisions and to promote public
|
||
‘support for existing and future community improvement efforts.
|
||
|
||
In addition, local planning commission members should be encouraged to
|
||
attend Planning Commissioner Institute training sessions offered periodically
|
||
throughout the year by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community
|
||
Development (VDHCD). Educational materials are also available from
|
||
VDHCD which should be distributed to local planning commissioners.
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 129 nd
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
|
||
Page 130
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Additional measures which can be promoted by the Town to increase public
|
||
awareness of local planning include the following:
|
||
|
||
1. Development of a brochure or graphic foldout illustrating the major
|
||
plan elements and providing an executive summary of the Plan.
|
||
|
||
2. Exhibits and displays of important Plan elements placed in the
|
||
Tazewell Municipal Building, Council Chambers, the library, public
|
||
schools, and other appropriate buildings.
|
||
|
||
3. Newspaper coverage of comprehensive plan adoption process,
|
||
highlights of land use and special zoning issues, in depth series of
|
||
articles on land use problems and opportunities in and around
|
||
Tazewell, series of interviews with individuals in responsible
|
||
positions in local and regional governmental agencies, business and
|
||
industry who influence future land use decisions.
|
||
|
||
Additional measures which can be promoted by the Town to increase public
|
||
awareness of local planning include the following:
|
||
|
||
1.
|
||
|
||
Development of a brochure or graphic foldout illustrating the major
|
||
plan elements and providing an executive summary of the Plan.
|
||
|
||
Exhibits and displays of important Plan elements placed in the
|
||
Tazewell Municipal Building, Council Chambers, the library, public
|
||
schools, and other appropriate buildings.
|
||
|
||
Newspaper coverage of comprehensive plan adoption process,
|
||
highlights of land use and special zoning issues, in depth series of
|
||
articles on land use problems and opportunities in and around
|
||
Tazewell, series of interviews with individuals in responsible
|
||
positions in local and regional governmental agencies, business and
|
||
industry who influence future land use decisions,
|
||
|
||
PLAN
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION
|
||
Page 130
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
P.O. BOX 608
|
||
|
||
201 CENTRAL AVENUE
|
||
TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA 24651
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
TOWN OF TAZEWELL
|
||
P.O. BOX 608
|
||
201 CENTRAL AVENUE
|
||
TAZEWELL, VIRGINIA 24651
|
||
|
||
|
||
|