This Profile Includes Information Regarding the Demographic and Infrastructure Characteristics

SECTION THREE / JURISDICTIONAL PROFILES

This section of the plan contains information about each individual jurisdiction of the county: Alford, Bascom, Campbellton, Cottondale, Graceville, Grand Ridge, Greenwood, Jacob, Malone, Marianna, Sneads and unincorporated Jackson County. Local agencies and organizations serving each jurisdiction developed the profiles of: Alford, Bascom, Cambellton, Cottondale, Graceville, Grand Ridge, Greenwood, Jacob, Malone, Marianna, Sneads and the unincorporated areas of JacksonCounty. The approach of the Task Force was to catalogue the results of the planning effort by jurisdiction, in order to provide information and analysis that will support the jurisdiction’s efforts to implement their priority mitigation initiatives. In addition, the jurisdiction profiles created a “baseline” or starting point for the Task Force to identify potential vulnerabilities to future disasters and to initially indicate avenues for pursuing evaluations and assessments throughout the county as the planning process continues in the future.

This profile includes information regarding the demographic and infrastructure characteristics of each jurisdiction, a list of plans and codes governing the jurisdiction, and a general description of land uses and development trends. All demographic data was obtained from the United States Census Bureau 2007 estimates. The county’s Community Development Department / Planning Division provided all other information.

There may be differences among the amount of information or analysis provided for each jurisdiction. This may be a result of the differing characteristics of the jurisdictions, the information and data available to use in the analysis and the time available for the jurisdiction’s representatives to conduct the planning process.

Since the county’s first LMS was developed and implemented in 1999 Jackson County and all the county’s municipalities have all been full participants in the process. In addition, all jurisdictions remain committed to the idea of enhancing the county’s disaster resistance through the concepts and activities of disaster mitigation.

Jackson County
Figure # 3.1 / Geographic Location of Jackson County

Figure # 3.2 / Map of Jackson County

Table # 3.1 / Jackson County Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 49,656
Geographic Size / 911 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 54
Current Growth Trend / 0.05% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Educational Services – 10%
Public Administration – 39%
Retail – 12%
Income / Median Household Income – $36,628
Persons Living Below Poverty Level –27%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Land Use Code and Zoning Ordinance
A Building Code
A Fire / Life Safety Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of9
Participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Current NFIP Community Ranking System (CRS) rating of 9
Development Trends / The county’s unincorporated areas are not considered to be fully developed.
Development of vacant and unused land is occurring but has slowed down in recent years due to the economy.
Expansion, redevelopment and reconstruction of existing properties are occurring to some properties in a few locations.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the county currently faces.

Page | 1

Figure # 3.3 / Jackson County Land Use Map

Page | 1

Table # 3.2 / Jackson County Current Land Use (2009)

Land Use Categories

Page | 1

Town of Alford
Figure # 3.4 / Map of Alford

Table # 3.4 / Alford Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 490
Geographic Size / 1.28 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 367
Current Growth Trend / 0.09% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Health Care – 16%
Accommodation / Food Services – 16%
Retail – 9%
Food / Beverage Services– 8%
Construction – 7%
Income / Median Household Income – $26,845
Persons Living Below Poverty Level – 36.9%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 8
Participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Non Participant in the NFIP Community Ranking System (CRS)
Development Trends / The community is considered to be fully developed.
Currently there is little development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.5 / Alford Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 10%
Commercial / 5%
Developed Mixed Uses / 5%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 0%
Residential / 80%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%
Table # 3.6 / Alford Future Land Uses

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 10%
Commercial / 15%
Developed Mixed Uses / 10%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 0%
Residential / 65%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%

Page | 1

Town of Bascom
Figure # 3.5 / Map of Bascom

Table # 3.7 / Bascom Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 110
Geographic Size / .24 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 107
Current Growth Trend / 0.09% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Construction – 29%
Public Administration – 21%
Educational Services – 14%
Food / Beverage Services – 7%
Real Estate Services – 7%
Income / Median Household Income – $37,653
Persons Living Below Poverty Level – 6.3%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 10
Development Trends / The community is considered to be fully developed.
Currently there is little or no development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.8 / Bascom Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 0%
Commercial / 0%
Developed Mixed Uses / 0%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 0%
Residential / 100%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%
Table # 3.9 / Bascom Future Land Uses

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 0%
Commercial / 10%
Developed Mixed Uses / 0%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 0%
Residential / 90%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%

Page | 1

Town of Campbellton
Figure # 3.6 / Map of Campbellton

Page | 1

Table # 3.10 / Campbellton Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 223
Geographic Size / .89Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 223
Current Growth Trend / No Change Since 2000
Economy / Public Administration – 26%
Agriculture – 12%
Professional – 12%
Construction – 11%
Retail – 5%
Income / Median Household Income – $30,976
Persons Living Below Poverty Level – 16.6%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 6
Participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Non Participant in the NFIP Community Ranking System (CRS)
Development Trends / The community is considered to be fully developed.
Currently there is little or no development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.11 / Campbellton Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 69.8%
Commercial / 5%
Developed Mixed Uses / 1%
Industrial / 5%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 3.2%
Residential / 13%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 1%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 2%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%
Table # 3.12 / Campbellton Future Land Uses

Land Use Categories

Page | 1

City of Cottondale
Figure # 3.7 / Map of Cottondale

Page | 1

Table # 3.13 / Cottondale Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 878
Geographic Size / 1.52 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 579
Current Growth Trend / 0.1% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Construction – 17%
Educational Services – 14%
Public Administration – 6%
Agriculture – 6%
Food / Beverage Services – 6%
Income / Median Household Income – $28,601
Persons Living Below Poverty Level – 27.4%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 5
Participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Non Participant in the NFIP Community Ranking System (CRS)
Development Trends / The community is considered to be fully developed.
Currently there is little or no development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.14 / Cottondale Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 25%
Commercial / 0%
Developed Mixed Uses / 0%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 0%
Residential / 75%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%
Table # 3.15 / Cottondale Future Land Uses

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 20%
Commercial / 5%
Developed Mixed Uses / 0%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 0%
Residential / 75%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%

Page | 1

City of Graceville
Figure # 3.8 / Map of Graceville

Page | 1

Table # 3.16 / Graceville Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 2,425
Geographic Size / 4.3 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 564
Current Growth Trend / 1.0% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Educational Services – 14%
Public Administration – 11%
Construction – 8%
Organization – 7%
Textile – 5%
Income / Median Household Income – $32,118
Persons Living Below Poverty Level – 20.7%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 7
Participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Current NFIP Community Ranking System (CRS) rating of 10
Development Trends / The community is considered to be fully developed.
Currently there is little or no development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.17 / Graceville Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 25%
Commercial / 0%
Developed Mixed Uses / 0%
Industrial / 5%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 0%
Residential / 75%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%
Town of Grand Ridge
Figure # 3.9 / Map of Grand Ridge

Page | 1

Table # 3.19 / Grand Ridge Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 976
Geographic Size / 2.64 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 370
Current Growth Trend / 2.1% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Construction – 21%
Health Care – 15%
Public Administration – 9%
Accommodation / Food Services – 9%
Truck Transportation – 4%
Income / Median Household Income – $36,356
Persons Living Below Poverty Level –21.3%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of7
Participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Current NFIP Community Ranking System (CRS) rating of8
Development Trends / The community is considered to be partially developed.
Currently there is little or no development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.20 / Grand Ridge Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 25%
Commercial / 10%
Developed Mixed Uses / 5%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 5%
Residential / 35%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 5%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 5%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 10%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%
Table # 3.21 / Grand Ridge Future Land Uses

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 20%
Commercial / 10%
Developed Mixed Uses / 5%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 1%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 5%
Residential / 39%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 5%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 5%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 10%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%

Page | 1

Town of Greenwood
Figure # 3.10 / Map of Greenwood

Page | 1

Table # 3.22 / Greenwood Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 779
Geographic Size / 4.8 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 162
Current Growth Trend / 4.66% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Public Administration – 11%
Educational Services – 16%
Health Care – 10%
Accommodation / Food Services – 8%
Machinery – 8%
Income / Median Household Income – $28,750
Persons Living Below Poverty Level – 17.8%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 7
Development Trends / The community is not considered to be fully developed.
Currently there is little or no development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.23 / Greenwood Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 65.6%
Commercial / 0.6%
Developed Mixed Uses / 0%
Industrial / 1.2%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0.3%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 6.56%
Residential / 24.8%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%
Table # 3.24 / Greenwood Future Land Uses

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 62.5%
Commercial / 0.98%
Developed Mixed Uses / 0%
Industrial / 1.31%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0.3%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 6.91%
Residential / 27.9%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%

Page | 1

City of Jacob
Figure # 3.11 / Map of Jacob

Page | 1

Table # 3.25 / Jacob Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 290
Geographic Size / 3.1 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 137
Current Growth Trend / 3.2% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Construction – 22%
Health Care – 14%
Textile – 11%
Machinery – 11%
Rail Transportation – 11%
Income / Median Household Income – $34,282
Persons Living Below Poverty Level – 26%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 7
Development Trends / The community is not considered to be fully developed.
Currently there is little or no development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.26 / Jacob Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 45%
Commercial / 0%
Developed Mixed Uses / 0%
Industrial / 0%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 0%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 3%
Residential / 40%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 12%
Table # 3.27 / Jacob Future Land Uses

Land Use Categories

Page | 1

City of Malone
Figure # 3.12 / Map of Malone

Page | 1

Table # 3.28 / Malone Jurisdictional Profile
Profile / Data
Population / 2,087
Geographic Size / 3.13 Square Miles
Persons Per Square Mile / 667
Current Growth Trend / 4% Increase Since 2000
Economy / Public Administration – 22%
Agriculture – 7%
Educational Services – 7%
Retail – 7%
Health Care – 7%
Income / Median Household Income – $39,900
Persons Living Below Poverty Level – 10.8%
Maintains / A Comprehensive Land Use Plan
A Building Code
Current Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 7
Participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Non Participant in the NFIP Community Ranking System (CRS)
Development Trends / The community is not considered to be fully developed.
Currently there is little or no development taking place.
Expansion, redevelopment or reconstruction of existing properties is occurring to a very limited degree.
Potential development will face hazards identical to those the community currently faces.
Table # 3.29 / Malone Current Land Uses (2009)

Land Use Categories

/ Percent of Jurisdiction Included
Agricultural / 62%
Commercial / 1%
Developed Mixed Uses / 4%
Industrial / 2%
Institutional (education, health care, etc.) / 13%
Parks / Restricted Wild Land / Wildlife Refuge / 1%
Residential / 12%
Transportation or Utility Right-of-Way / 5%
Vacant / Unused – Government Ownership / 0%
Vacant / Unused – Private Ownership / 0%
Waterway / Lake / Wetland / 0%
Table # 3.30 / Malone Future Land Uses

Land Use Categories

Page | 1

City of Marianna
Figure # 3.13 / Map of Marianna