Madison County Growth Policy - 2012

MADISON COUNTY
GROWTH POLICY
2012
Adopted March 2013
Resolution 11-2013
Web Based Version

Growth Policy 2012 - Page 1-2
MADISON COUNTY GROWTH POLICY
2012
Updating the Madison County Growth Policy (last adopted 2006)
Adopted March 2013, Resolution 11-2013
Drafted by the
Madison County Planning Office and Planning Board
Lane Adamson Dave Maddison

Jan Kluver Banks Richard Meehan
Clyde Carroll Eileen Pearce
Dorothy Davis Laurie Schmidt
Kathy Looney
John Lounsbury Charity Fechter, Director
Don Loyd Leona Stredwick, Technician
Revised and Adopted by the

Madison County Board of Commissioners
James P. Hart, Chairman

David Schulz
Dan Happel
For more information, contact the

Madison County Planning Office
P.O. Box 278
Virginia City, MT 59755
(406) 843-5250
http://www.madison.mt.gov/departments/plan/planning.asp
Table of Contents
1. Summary .........................................................................................................1-1
1.1 Purpose .....................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Vision .........................................................................................................1-1
1.3 Guiding Principles...................................................................................... 1-2
1.4 Goals and Objectives................................................................................. 1-2
1.5 Land Development and Conservation Utilization Policies .......................... 1-5
1.6 Shared Community Values ........................................................................ 1-5
1.7 Document Organization .............................................................................1-5
2. Introduction ......................................................................................................2-1
2.1 Jurisdictional Area ..................................................................................... 2-2
2.2 Purpose .....................................................................................................2-2
2.3 Authority.....................................................................................................2-2
2.4 Process......................................................................................................2-3
2.5 History of the Growth Policy.......................................................................2-4
2.5.1 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update ..................................................... 2-4
2.5.2 2006 Madison County Growth Policy .................................................. 2-5
2.6 Role of Previous Plans/Policies ................................................................. 2-6
3. Guiding Principles, Goals and Objectives ........................................................ 3-1
3.1 Madison County in the Year 2022: Our Vision .......................................... 3-1
3.2 Guiding Principles...................................................................................... 3-1
3.2.1 Guiding Principle #1. Locate new development close to existing services
and communities.............................................................................................. 3-1
3.2.2 Guiding Principle #2. Protect our river corridors.................................. 3-2
3.2.3 Guiding Principle #3. Preserve our most productive agricultural lands 3-2
3.2.4 Guiding Principle #4. New development should pay its own way........ 3-2
3.2.5 Guiding Principle #5. Respect private property rights.......................... 3-2
3.3 Goals and Objectives................................................................................. 3-2
3.3.1 Goal 1. Land Use ............................................................................... 3-2
3.3.2 Goal 2. The Economy......................................................................... 3-3
3.3.3 Goal 3. The Environment ................................................................... 3-3
3.3.4 Goal 4. Recreation ............................................................................. 3-3
3.3.5 Goal 5. Public Services ......................................................................3-4
3.3.6 Goal 6. Communication, Coordination, Citizen Participation (3C’s) ... 3-4
3.4 Land Development and Conservation/Utilization Policies .......................... 3-5
Growth Policy 2012 - Page i

3.5 Shared Community Values ........................................................................ 3-9
3.6 References .............................................................................................. 3-10
4. Existing Characteristics ................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Use of County Profile Information .............................................................. 4-1
4.2 Madison County History............................................................................. 4-1
4.3 Population..................................................................................................4-2
4.4 Land...........................................................................................................4-6
4.5 Land Status and Use ................................................................................. 4-7
4.6 Land Use and Natural Resources.............................................................. 4-7
4.7 Jobs ......................................................................................................... 4-10
4.8 Income ..................................................................................................... 4-11
4.9 Housing.................................................................................................... 4-12
4.10 Public Finance, Public Services............................................................ 4-13
4.11 Public Facilities..................................................................................... 4-14
4.11.1 Schools .......................................................................................... 4-14
4.11.2 Transportation................................................................................ 4-15
4.12 Natural Resources................................................................................ 4-15
4.12.1 Water ............................................................................................. 4-15
4.12.2 Mineral ........................................................................................... 4-16
4.12.3 Air .................................................................................................. 4-16
4.12.4 Wind Energy .................................................................................. 4-16
4.12.5 Weed Management........................................................................ 4-16
4.12.6 Soils ............................................................................................... 4-17
4.12.7 Sand and Gravel Resources .......................................................... 4-17
4.13 Emergency Response Times................................................................ 4-17
4.14 Fish and Wildlife ................................................................................... 4-17
4.15 Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)............................................................ 4-17
4.16 Hazards ................................................................................................ 4-18
4.17 Agriculture and Open Space ................................................................ 4-18
4.18 Recreation (districts, facilities, public lands) ......................................... 4-18
4.19 Maps..................................................................................................... 4-19
4.19.1 Disclaimer ...................................................................................... 4-19
4.19.2 Updates.......................................................................................... 4-19
5. Projected Trends .............................................................................................5-1
Growth Policy 2012 - Page ii

5.1 Population..................................................................................................5-1
5.2 Land Use and Natural Resources.............................................................. 5-1
5.3 Housing......................................................................................................5-9
5.4 Income and Employment ......................................................................... 5-10
5.5 Local Services and Public Facilities......................................................... 5-10
6. Implementation Policies, Regulations and Other Plan Measures .................... 6-1
6.1 Plan Implementation – Recommended Actions ......................................... 6-1
6.2 Timetable ...................................................................................................6-1
7. Public Infrastructure Strategy........................................................................... 7-1
8. Intergovernmental Coordination....................................................................... 8-1
8.1 Special Planning Areas..............................................................................8-1
8.2 Coordination with Community Plans .......................................................... 8-1
8.3 Incorporation of Other County Plans.......................................................... 8-2
8.4 State and Federal Agency Plans ............................................................... 8-2
9. Growth Policy and Subdivision Review............................................................ 9-1
9.1 Review Criteria .......................................................................................... 9-1
9.2 Subdivision evaluation process with respect to criteria.............................. 9-1
9.3 Public Hearing Process..............................................................................9-2
9.4 Purpose/Role of Overall Development Plan............................................... 9-2
9.5 Exemptions ................................................................................................9-3
10. Other Elements ........................................................................................... 10-1
10.1 Madison Valley Plan ............................................................................. 10-1
10.2 1983 Madison River Corridor Study...................................................... 10-2
10.3 Madison Valley ..................................................................................... 10-2
10.4 Ruby Valley, Jefferson Valley, Beaverhead Valley ............................... 10-3
10.5 Virginia City/Nevada City Area ............................................................. 10-3
10.6 Big Hole Watershed.............................................................................. 10-3
11. List of Appendices and Reference Documents ........................................... 11-1
11.1 Appendices........................................................................................... 11-1
11.2 Reference Documents.......................................................................... 11-1
APPENDIX A. Glossary of Terms……………………………………………………...A-1
APPENDIX B. Discussion of Subdivision Review Criteria …….……………………B-1
Growth Policy 2012 - Page iii

List of Tables
Table 3-1 - New Development Policies ................................................................... 3-5

Table 3-2 - Land Conservation Policies .................................................................. 3-8
Table 4-1 - Population by Area in Madison County, 1990-2010.............................. 4-3
Table 4-2 - Components of Residential Population Change ................................... 4-3
Table 4-3 - Parcels Created through Subdivision & Certificates of Survey ............. 4-8
Table 4-4 - Madison County Land Division Activity Summary................................. 4-8
Table 4-5 - Summary of Recorded Conservation Easements in Madison County,
2000-2011 ............................................................................................4-9
Table 4-6 - Top 10 employers in Madison County ................................................ 4-10
Table 4-7 - Income and Employment .................................................................... 4-12
Table 4-8 - 2010 Housing Data ............................................................................. 4-12
Table 4-9 - Madison County School Enrollment, October 2011 ............................ 4-14
Table 5-1 - Residential Unit Growth by Fire District (September 2010 Estimate) ... 5-8
Table 6-1 – Recommended Actions by Category (from the 1999 Comprehensive
Plan).....................................................................................................6-2
Table 6-2 - Recommended Regulatory Actions (from the 1999 Comprehensive Plan)
.............................................................................................................6-9
Table 6-3 - Status of Work on Implementation Actions Recommended in 2006
Growth Policy / New Actions 2012 ..................................................... 6-12
Table 6-4 - Other Planning Board Accomplishments Since 1999 ......................... 6-23
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 - Madison County with Commissioner Districts.................................... 1-7
Figure 4-1 - Historic Population, 1890-2010 ......................................................... 4-4
Figure 4-2 - Madison County 2010 Population by Gender and Age Group........... 4-6
Figure 4-3 - Subdivisions .................................................................................... 4-20
Figure 4-4 - Development ................................................................................... 4-21
Figure 4-5 - Water Resources............................................................................. 4-22
Figure 4-6 - Wind Speed..................................................................................... 4-23
Figure 4-7 - Wind Power ..................................................................................... 4-24
Figure 4-8 - Noxious Weeds on Public Lands ..................................................... 4-25
Figure 4-9 - Sand and Gravel Resources ........................................................... 4-26
Figure 4-10 - Emergency Response – Ambulance ............................................... 4-27
Figure 4-11 - Emergency Response – Fire ........................................................... 4-28
Figure 4-12 - Emergency Response - Law Enforcement ...................................... 4-29
Figure 4-13 - Big Game Summer Range .............................................................. 4-30
Figure 4-14 - Big Game Winter Range.................................................................. 4-31
Figure 4-15 - Forest Species Linkage ................................................................... 4-32
Figure 4-16 - Species of Concern ......................................................................... 4-33
Figure 4-17 - Wildland - Urban Interface............................................................... 4-34
Growth Policy 2012 - Page iv

Figure 4-18 - Potential Hazards ............................................................................ 4-35
Figure 4-19 - Agricultural Land ............................................................................. 4-36
Figure 5-1 - Madison County Population, 1890-2010............................................ 5-3
Figure 5-2 - Madison County Population Projection.............................................. 5-4
Figure 5-3 - Observed and Forecasted Development in Madison County ............ 5-5
Figure 5-4 - 2025 Forecast Growth Areas............................................................. 5-6
Figure 5-5 - Madison County - 2010 Vacant Housing Units .................................. 5-9
Figure 5-6 - Madison County Per Capita Personal Income................................. 5-12
Figure 5-7 - Madison County Employment by Industry ....................................... 5-14
Figure 5-8 - Madison County Employment (1,000’s of Jobs) .............................. 5-15
Figure 5-9 - Madison County Employment (proportion) ...................................... 5-17
Growth Policy 2012 - Page v

1. Summary
Based on comments received on the questionnaire and at public meetings held
throughout the County, people are generally satisfied with the vision, guiding
principles, goals and objectives adopted in the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update
and 2006 Madison County Growth Policy (2006 Growth Policy) (1). As the vision,
guiding principles, goals and objectives, and recommended implementation are
substantially the same as in the 2006 Growth Policy, this 2012 Growth Policy is
considered an updating revision.
The primary changes in the 2012 Growth Policy are:

• Document reorganized;
• Maps and base data updated and expanded;
• Existing characteristics section expanded and updated;
• Projected trends revised to reflect revised data;
• Madison County’s vision clarified and shared community values added, as
suggested by citizens;
• Sand and gravel resources addressed, as now required by statute; and
• Additional implementation actions included as suggested by citizens.
Figure 1-1 is general map of Madison County, including the 2011 Commissioner
Districts.
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this Growth Policy Update is threefold: (1) revise the Madison
County Growth Policy to ensure that it meets the standards of a Growth Policy, as
outlined in 76-1-601, MCA; (2) keep the Growth Policy current in its goals and
recommended actions; and (3) provide more effective guidance on local decisions
on growth, development, and conservation over the next 5-10 years.
Madison County encourages and supports development that meets the County’s
vision, guiding principles, goals and objectives.
1.2 Vision
In the year 2022, Madison County is still a place we’re proud to call home, still:
Blessed with people who are hardworking yet fun-loving, independent yet
compassionate and generous in time of need;
Devoted to supporting our youth and senior populations;
Relatively free of crime and pollution;
Rich in water, scenic beauty, wildlife, historical, and recreational resources;
Rural in character and agriculturally productive;
Rooted in the tradition of being good stewards of the land;
Focused on protecting rights of all citizens.
Growth Policy 2012 – Page 1-1

In the year 2022, Madison County’s economy has gained strength and diversity, with
agricultural households enjoying a more financially secure position. Our river
corridors, hayfields, rangelands, and foothills have not become cluttered by
scattered residential development and noxious weeds have lost their foothold on our
landscape. Our towns have retained their small-town atmosphere, while offering a
variety of goods and services to local residents and visitors, and families of modest
income levels can afford to live here. Local public services have adequate funds to
support our increased population, the art of being a good neighbor is widely
practiced by both newcomers and old-timers, and we have become even better
stewards of the land.
1.3 Guiding Principles
• Guiding Principle #1. Locate new development close to existing

services and communities
Requires attention to both locational considerations and service system
capabilities.
• Guiding Principle #2. Protect our river corridors

Requires attention to environmental, public health and safety, recreation, and
aesthetic concerns.
• Guiding Principle #3. Preserve our most productive agricultural lands

Requires attention to economic, environmental, and cultural issues.
• Guiding Principle #4. New development should pay its own way
Requires attention to fiscal and equity issues of concern to many County
taxpayers and officials.
• Guiding Principle #5. Respect private property rights

A reminder that Madison County officials will be cognizant of, and abide by,
state and federal constitutional law as it pertains to private property rights.
Consideration of this principle, however, will be balanced by consideration of
the public interest, generally defined as the public health, safety, and welfare.
1.4 Goals and Objectives
Our goals and objectives for land use, the economy, the environment, recreation,
and public services have not changed dramatically in the 40 years since Madison
County’s first comprehensive plan was completed. But as our world has grown more
complex, our actions increasingly affect multiple aspects of community life. Likewise,
our goals must be regarded as increasingly interconnected.
Goal 1. Land Use: Use our land base to support a mix of activities (agriculture,
residential, commercial, industrial, public facilities, and recreation) in ways that
accommodate growth, minimize conflict among adjacent land uses, promote efficient
use of land, protect public health and safety, and reflect the five Guiding Principles.

Objectives:
a. Develop landowner-supported, neighborhood-specific strategies for land
utilization, development, and conservation.
b. Locate development in areas that are:
• physically suitable for development, and
• easily accessed by public services.
c. Keep development out of the floodplain and riparian areas.
d. Locate and design developments to maintain the water resource and
water rights (in accordance with state law).
e. Locate and design developments to be safe from natural disasters.
f. Locate and design developments in ways that preserve open space.
g. Expand affordable housing opportunities. Encourage projects that are
well-designed and accessible to public services. Avoid concentrations of
lower-income housing.
h. Discourage scattered rural residential development.
i. Discourage strip commercial development along arterial highways.
j. Discourage development in highly productive agricultural lands.
Goal 2. The Economy: Strengthen the major sectors of our local economy, and
diversify the economic base. Encourage the responsible development of natural
resources.
Objectives:
a. Support growth in agriculture, forestry, mining, renewable energy,
recreation and tourism, retirement and senior-related services,
entrepreneurial enterprises, and construction activity.
b. Utilize and protect the resources which support these major economic
sectors.
c. Support the economic viability of family farms and ranches.
d. Acknowledge the economic value of the County’s fisheries, wildlife, and
wildlife habitat.
e. Promote public awareness of the importance of supporting existing local
businesses.
f. Promote new business and industry which are compatible with the major
economic sectors and do not put a financial strain on public services.
g. Expand the opportunities for year-round employment.
Goal 3. The Environment: Protect the quality of our air, groundwater, surface
waters, soils, vegetation, fish and wildlife habitat, scenic views, cultural and historic
resources.
Objectives:
a. Promote best management practices by all land users.
b. Encourage new development that is compatible with the environmental
goals and objectives of this Plan.

c. Support the establishment, expansion, and upgrading of community
sewer/water systems.
d. Review new development proposals for the full spectrum of potential and
cumulative environmental impacts.
e. Where necessary, more clearly define the resources we want to protect.
f. Promote and support noxious weed control.
Goal 4. Recreation: Support a variety of recreational opportunities for both local

residents and visitors.
Objectives:
a. Retain public access to public lands and waters.
b. Support opportunities to create additional public access in cooperation
with willing private landowners.
c. Minimize conflicts between recreationalists and private landowners.
d. Support opportunities for public/private land exchanges which will secure
high-value recreational resources for public use.
e. Recognize that recreationalists utilize local public services to a great
extent.
Goal 5. Public Services: Provide high-quality public services to local residents

and visitors in safe, fair, and cost-effective ways.
Objectives:
a. Encourage new development to locate in areas which have ready access
to public services. Discourage new development which will put a financial
strain on public services and/or negatively influence the economy.
b. Maintain and improve County roads and bridges according to priorities
which are consistent with County land use policies.
c. Devise strategies to assess service users, including recreationalists, who
are not currently helping to pay for service costs.
d. Explore other sources of funds to support the provision of public services.
e. Support the community infrastructure improvements needed to entice new
development to locate close to existing towns and services.
Goal 6. Communication, Coordination, Citizen Participation (3C’s): Promote

an open, inclusive, and coordinated approach to planning for the future in Madison
County (Leadership in this regard will be provided by the County Commissioners).
Objectives:
a. Consult with town officials and other local service providers on a regular
basis. As much as possible, support their efforts to plan and pay for future
growth and improve public services.
b. Meet regularly with state and federal land managers to discuss respective
land use plans, management strategies, and specific projects/project
proposals.

c. Maintain open communications with the public on planning and
development issues. Provide ample opportunity for local citizens to
participate in planning and plan implementation.
1.5 Land Development and Conservation Utilization Policies
In addition to the Guiding Principles and set of goals and objectives, additional
policies will guide development in Madison County. Table 3-1 describes the policies
related to new development. Policies related to land conservation/utilization
activities are described in Table 3-2.
1.6 Shared Community Values
The Shared Community Values are the things that bring people to Madison County,
support our economy, protect our future, and are our responsibility as good
stewards. All of the shared community values identified for the Madison Valley (2)
were considered “Very Important” by respondents to the questionnaire. Many of the
questionnaire responses noted how interrelated these values are; to lose one affects
others, and they all affect the quality of life in Madison County. Development should
enhance or support these values.
• Open Space
• Wildlife
• Small Town Attributes
• Natural Beauty
• Ranching (Agriculture)
• Viewshed
• Outdoor Recreation and Public Land Access
• Healthy Economy, including good jobs and housing opportunities
• Quality low impact development
1.7 Document Organization
The 2012 Growth Policy is organized into chapters that roughly correspond to the
requirements listed in Montana statute.
The Introduction describes the jurisdictional area, the statutory authority for a growth
policy, the growth policy development process, a history of the 2012 growth policy,
and the role of previous plans and policies.
Guiding Principles, Goals and Objectives describe Madison County’s overall vision,
the principles to guide realizing that vision, goals and objectives for each of the
principles, land conservation and utilization policies, and the role of previous plans
and polices.

Existing Characteristics presents various aspects of Madison County as it is. Using
the most current information available, texts and maps describe the County’s
population, ownership, income, housing, jobs, land use, natural resources, sand and
gravel resources, emergency response times, fish and wildlife, the wildland-urban
interface (WUI), potential hazards, agriculture and open space, and recreation.
Projected Trends begins with the existing characteristics and estimates where
Madison County will be in the future in regards to: population; land and natural
resources; housing; income and employment; and local services and public facilities.
Implementation Policies, Regulations and Other Plan Measures builds on the

previous sections to describe the specific actions needed to reach Madison County’s
goals.
Public Infrastructure Strategy addresses how Madison County will identify and pay
for needed infrastructure.
Intergovernmental Coordination discusses how Madison County will deal with

special planning areas, coordinate with community plans, incorporate other county
plans, and participate in state and federal agency plans.
Growth Policy and Subdivision Review specifically describes the subdivision review
process, beginning with the statutory review criteria, followed by how subdivisions
will be evaluated with respect to the criteria, the public hearing process, how overall
development plans fit in the process, and exemptions allowed by statue.
Other Elements recognizes the past and ongoing planning efforts, and areas where
additional effort may be needed.
Appendices and Reference Documents are the supplemental materials that provide
additional detail and context. The appendices are attached as part of this document.
Reference documents are stand-alone documents, including other adopted plans
and supporting studies and projects.

Figure 1-1 - Madison County with Commissioner Districts
Please click the map below for a larger/printable map.
Growth Policy 2012 - Summary Page 1-7

2. Introduction
Madison County encourages and supports development that meets the County’s
vision, guiding principles, goals and objectives.
Madison County’s first Comprehensive Plan was prepared by the Planning Board
and adopted by the County Commissioners in 1973. The Plan attempted to address
two problems: (1) the loss of agricultural lands to increasing recreational and second
home development; and (2) the seasonal nature of the County’s agricultural and
recreational employment.
Thirteen years later, in response to mounting development pressures in the Madison

Valley, the Planning Board began work on a revision of the 1973 Plan. The Plan
Update was completed in 1988. It contained a stricter set of countywide subdivision
review policies. It also included a land use plan for the Madison Valley.
The decade up to the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update was marked by continued
growth and change. Madison County’s beauty and rural character attracted more
residents and visitors. The interests and values of County citizens grew more
diverse. Recreation and tourism, retirement-related services, entrepreneurial
enterprises, and construction activity joined the traditional industries of agriculture,
forestry, and mining as important economic sectors. Land became increasingly
valued for its aesthetic and recreational assets, rather than its agricultural
productivity. This trend, combined with other factors such as land speculation and
declining agricultural incomes, led to the conversion of more rangeland and farmland
to residential subdivision and recreational development. Such social, cultural,
economic, and land use changes were not confined to the Madison Valley. They
were evident also in the Ruby Valley, in the Jefferson Valley, and at Big Sky. Over
the next ten years, transitions in other parts of the County are likely.
The Madison County Growth Policy adopted in 2006 (1) amended the 1999
Comprehensive Plan Update and brought it up to new statutory standards. The
Madison Valley Growth Management Action Plan adopted in 2007 set objectives and
implementation measures specific to the Madison Valley (2).
Growth and change impact a variety of County resources, including the economic
base, air and water, vegetation and wildlife, open landscape, sense of community,
and public service systems. Many long-time County residents perceive the negative
impacts of growth and change as a serious threat to their rural lifestyle. Many
newcomers fear that continued growth and change will degrade the quality of life
which drew them here. These impacts and fears have been aggravated by the
uncertainties created since a major national recession began in late 2007.

The Madison County Commissioners, in turn, face increasingly difficult decisions
regarding land development and conservation. One of their greatest challenges is to
provide essential public services at an affordable cost to an expanding population.
The Planning Board and County Commissioners recognize the need to strengthen
their capacity to address the issues associated with growth and change. Hence, this
update to the Madison County Growth Policy.
2.1 Jurisdictional Area
The jurisdictional area of the county planning board includes the area outside the
incorporated limits of cities or towns in the county. For purposes of subdivision
review, this area has been extended to include the towns of Sheridan and Twin
Bridges. [76-1-501, MCA]
2.2 Purpose
Like its predecessors, the Madison County Growth Policy (2006) and Madison
County Comprehensive Plan (1999), and Madison Valley Growth Management
Action Plan (2007) served as guides for County elected officials, citizens, and
developers engaged in making decisions about land use, economic development,
and capital investment.
Growth and change will continue to play a part in Madison County’s future. The
primary objective of this planning document is to equip County officials and citizens
with the policies and tools needed to guide future growth and change in ways that
will not only accommodate new priorities and opportunities, but also preserve long-
valued resources and traditions.
It should be clearly stated that, while the Growth Policy guides County decision-
making on land utilization, including subdivision, the decisions themselves must be
governed by local regulations and Montana state statutes. County officials will be
cognizant of, and abide by, state and federal law as it pertains to private property
rights.
The purpose of this Growth Policy Update is threefold: (1) revise the Madison
County Growth Policy to ensure that it meets the standards of a Growth Policy, as
outlined in 76-1-601, MCA; (2) keep the Growth Policy current in its goals and
recommended actions; and (3) provide more effective guidance on local decisions
on growth, development, and conservation over the next 5-10 years.
2.3 Authority
Montana State Statutes encourage county governments to “...improve the present

health, safety, convenience, and welfare of their citizens and to plan for the future
development of their communities...” [76-1-102, MCA]. State law authorizes county
commissioners to establish a county planning board as an advisory board to”…

promote the orderly development of its governmental units and its environs” [76-1-
101, MCA] and may request the planning board to prepare a growth policy.
The growth policy is defined as “...a comprehensive development plan, master plan,
or comprehensive plan that was adopted pursuant to this chapter before October 1,
1999, or a policy that was adopted pursuant to this chapter on or after October 1,
1999. [76-1-103, MCA]. The contents required in the growth policy are described in
76-1-601, MCA, which also allows the governing body the discretion to determine
the extent to which the growth policy addresses those elements, and the authority to
adopt additional elements.
Once a master plan, or comprehensive plan, has been adopted (or updated), the
county commissioners must be guided by the plan in making decisions on public
facility abandonment or improvements, adopting subdivision regulations, and
adopting zoning ordinances [76-1-605, MCA]. The county commissioners may also
require by resolution that subdivision plats must conform to the plan [76-1-606,
MCA]. The planning board remains involved in comprehensive plan implementation
in various ways, including the review of specific development proposals and
proposing appropriate policies, regulations and guidelines.
2.4 Process
This growth policy update began with Fiscal Impact Analysis and mapping projects
funded by the Community Development Block Program, Sonoran Institute, Future
West, and Madison County. The Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) provides a framework
for estimating the costs to the county associated with road and fire services against
the revenue received in the form of taxes (3). The mapping project used the most
current information to electronically map the elements required by a growth policy.
The maps were developed using available information and experts in the various
topics covered. These maps represent the existing conditions in the county.
A Planning for People and Wildlife mini-grant from the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation through the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks funded an
extensive questionnaire on growth policy topics, with special emphasis on wildlife
(4). Unlike a survey, which limits the individuals queried, the questionnaire was
intended to give any interested individuals the opportunity to voice their opinions.
The questionnaire was distributed to 5,604 boxholders and 2,200 subscribers to The
Madisonian in October 2011. It could be downloaded from the County’s website,
and a web-based version was available through Constant Contact. The preliminary
analysis indicates a broad range of individuals responded from throughout the
county, based on income, education, age, area of the county, and occupation. The
raw data results were available online and in hard copy at the libraries,
Commissioners’ office, and Planning office.
A total of 368 questionnaires with responses were returned. This represents

approximately 5.8% of the County population 18 years old and older (6,327). Using

a web-based sample size calculator (http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm), the
responses are within +/- 4.97% at the 95% confidence level, and +/- 6.54% at the
99% confidence level for the 18 & over group. Using the entire county population
(7,691) as the basis has very little impact on the statistical reliability of the
responses. Using the full population, at the 95% confidence level the confidence
interval is 4.99%, and 6.57% at the 99% confidence level.
In March 2012, a series of public forums were held in Big Sky, Ennis, Sheridan, Twin
Bridges and Pony, with an additional forum held with Sheridan High School
students. These forums were facilitated by Planning Board members to elicit
comment to guide development of the growth policy. In addition to requesting
comments on the draft maps, three open-ended questions were asked:
• What do you value most in your community?
• What do you see are the greatest threats to those values?
• What do you think should be done to maintain those values?
With the public comment indicating few major changes needed to the growth policy,
the planning board began updating the 2006/1999 document. The draft Growth
Policy (2012) was made available for public review and comment in October, 2012.
The public hearing held on October 29, 2012 was advertised in The Madisonian and
Lone Peak Lookout on October 4 and 18, with display ads scheduled for October 11
and 25, 2012. The Madisonian inadvertently left out the display ad scheduled for
October 11. The Planning Board recommended adoption of the Growth Policy by
Planning Board Resolution 1-2012 at their meeting of October 29, 2012. Resolution
No. 32-2012, a resolution of intention to adopt the Madison County Growth Policy
2012 Update, was approved by the County Commissioners on November 27, 2012.
The County Commissioners adopted the Growth Policy by Resolution 11-2013 on
March 5, 2013, as recommended by the Planning Board with some clarifying
revisions. The record of public input received throughout the planning process is
available in the Planning office (4).
2.5 History of the Growth Policy

2.5.1 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update
The preparation of the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update provided multiple
opportunities for public review and comment. In the spring and summer of 1998,
several community workshops were held around the County. The workshops had a
twofold purpose: (1) to provide information to local citizens; and (2) to gain direct
citizen involvement in shaping the direction of the Plan Update. Discussion focused
on five topics:
• Where Would You Put the Next 1000 People in Madison County?
• What Tools Can We Use to Guide Growth?
• Grassroots-Style Zoning
• Open Space and Development: How Can We Have Both?
• Getting New Development to Pay for Itself

Additional information-gathering activities were conducted, including a survey of 40
local service providers, a current land use inventory, the collection and mapping of
resource data, consultations with municipal officials, and a Planning for the Future
booth at the Madison County Fair. Four questions provided the basis for public
discussion at the Fair. They were:
• Where would you put the next residential development?
• Where would you least like to see the next residential development?
• Should the County restrict development along the river corridors?
• Do we need zoning in Madison County?
A draft Plan Update was made available for public review and comment during the
fall of 1998. Open houses were held around the County. Formal public hearings
followed. The Plan Update was adopted in February 1999 by the County
Commissioners, upon the recommendation of the Planning Board. Growth-related
issues and opportunities identified in 1999 still resonate with the citizens today:
• Differences between newcomer and long-time resident expectations and
lifestyles
• Loss of agricultural land to subdivision development
• Future viability of agriculture in the face of continued population growth based
on the County’s beauty, rural character, and recreational resources
• Growth of nontraditional industries
• Utilization of the resources on the land
• Fish and wildlife concerns
• Loss of open space and aesthetic value
• Cost of public services to support new development
• Adequacy of water supply to support new development
• State and federal requirements to improve water quality
• Need for sewer/water systems in Harrison and Alder
• Infrastructure improvement projects in Ennis, Sheridan, Twin Bridges, Virginia
City, and Big Sky
• Spread of noxious weeds
• Cost of county road/bridge maintenance
• Costs of county nursing home operations
• Initiative 105 ceiling on County mill levy
• Constitution Amendment No. 75 (voter approval of all new taxes – found
unconstitutional)
• Coordination between local, county, state, and federal governments
• Vacant commercial/industrial/institutional properties (e.g., Children’s Center
outside of Twin Bridges, greenhouse facility outside of Ennis)
2.5.2 2006 Madison County Growth Policy
Madison County citizens defined their Vision, Guiding Principles, Goals and
Objectives during development of the 1999 Comprehensive Plan. During the spring
and summer of 2006, public input on growth and the County’s growth management

efforts was solicited in a series of Community Conversations held in Big Sky, Ennis,
Harrison, Sheridan, Twin Bridges, and Virginia City. The discussions reinforced the
relevance and importance of the “umbrella” guidelines, and they emphasized the
need for a continuing effort to implement the goals, using a combination of growth
management tools. Local citizens raised a number of issues common to the
discussions that led up to the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update. However, some
new issues surfaced, and several “old” issues were discussed with a greater sense
of urgency. Among the concerns expressed during those community discussions,
were:
• Increased real estate values and limited housing supply have created a
serious shortage of both rental and fee ownership housing opportunities for
low and moderate-income residents.
• Our population is growing older, with young adults leaving and school
enrollments in decline.
• Efforts to upgrade municipal services such as sewer and water are critical to
future growth that makes efficient use of limited water supplies and reduces
reliance on individual wells and septic systems.
• New development should be clustered. Most of the new development should
occur close to existing towns.
• Planning for future growth should be better coordinated between the towns
and the county.
• We have a lot of guidelines for how new development should occur, but the
guidelines have no “teeth”.
• Existing development regulations must be enforced, and the rules may need
to be strengthened. Along with new rules should come incentives.
• We should expect new development to pay its own way.
• Efforts to help ranchers stay in business are important.
• We should continue our educational efforts aimed at helping citizens
understand the impacts of development.
• Pros and cons of conservation easements.
• Pros and cons of zoning – in town, in other higher-density areas, and/or in the
rural areas.
• Respect for private property rights is important, but community rights must
also be respected.
• We need to put greater emphasis on open space, river corridor, and wildlife
habitat protection.
The 2006 Growth Policy was amended in 2007 with the addition of the Madison
Valley Growth Management Action Plan.
2.6 Role of Previous Plans/Policies
Updating a growth policy does not invalidate all previous plans and policies. Since
planning is a continual process, each revised plan or policy builds upon its
predecessors.

The information contained in the 1973 Plan, 1988 Update, 1999 Comprehensive
Plan Update and 2006 Growth Policy continue to serve as valuable background for
planning in Madison County. The 2012 Madison County Growth Policy supplements
this information base with more current data. It revises the countywide goals and
objectives, policies, and proposed actions outlined in the previous County planning
documents. The Madison Valley Growth Management Action Plan (2007) is
incorporated in this 2012 Growth Policy.
This 2012 Madison County Growth Policy replaces the 1999 Comprehensive Plan
Update and 2006 Growth Policy documents (as amended) as the official Madison
County Growth Policy.

3. Guiding Principles, Goals and Objectives
3.1 Madison County in the Year 2022: Our Vision
What kind of future do we citizens of Madison County want for ourselves, our
children, and our grandchildren? What guiding principles for future growth will help
us achieve that future? What commonly held goals and objectives are we willing to
work towards?
In this, our 2012 update, citizen input came from the results of a detailed Growth
Policy questionnaire in the fall of 2011, followed by community meetings in the
spring of 2012 (4) which reaffirmed the Vision (with a few minor changes), Guiding
Principles, Goals and Objectives and added the adoption of the Madison Valley
Shared Community Values as Madison County’s Shared Community Values.
Our Vision
In the year 2022, Madison County is still a place we’re proud to call home, still:
Blessed with people who are hardworking yet fun-loving, independent yet
compassionate and generous in time of need;
Devoted to supporting our youth and senior populations;
Relatively free of crime and pollution;
Rich in water, scenic beauty, wildlife, historical, and recreational resources;
Rural in character and agriculturally productive;
Rooted in the tradition of being good stewards of the land.
Focused on protecting rights of all citizens.
In the year 2022, Madison County’s economy has gained strength and diversity, with
agricultural households enjoying a more financially secure position. Our river
corridors, hayfields, rangelands, and foothills have not become cluttered by
scattered residential development and noxious weeds have lost their foothold on our
landscape. Our towns have retained their small-town atmosphere, while offering a
variety of goods and services to local residents and visitors, and families of modest
income levels can afford to live here. Local public services have adequate funds to
support our increased population, the art of being a good neighbor is widely
practiced by both newcomers and old-timers, and we have become even better
stewards of the land.
3.2 Guiding Principles

3.2.1 Guiding Principle #1. Locate new development close to existing
services and communities
Requires attention to both locational considerations and service system capabilities.

3.2.2 Guiding Principle #2. Protect our river corridors
Requires attention to environmental, public health and safety, recreation, and
aesthetic concerns.
3.2.3 Guiding Principle #3. Preserve our most productive agricultural lands
Requires attention to economic, environmental, and cultural issues.
3.2.4 Guiding Principle #4. New development should pay its own way
Requires attention to fiscal and equity issues of concern to many County taxpayers
and officials.
3.2.5 Guiding Principle #5. Respect private property rights
A reminder that Madison County officials will be cognizant of, and abide by, state
and federal constitutional law as it pertains to private property rights. Consideration
of this principle, however, will be balanced by consideration of the public interest,
generally defined as the public health, safety, and welfare.
In Madison County, the public interest is more specifically defined by these five
Guiding Principles and the following set of Goals and Objectives.
3.3 Goals and Objectives
Our goals and objectives for land use, the economy, the environment, recreation,
and public services have not changed dramatically in the 40 years since Madison
County’s first comprehensive plan was completed. But as our world has grown more
complex, our actions increasingly affect multiple aspects of community life. Likewise,
our goals must be regarded as increasingly interconnected.
3.3.1 Goal 1. Land Use
Use our land base to support a mix of activities (agriculture, residential, commercial,
industrial, public facilities, and recreation) in ways that accommodate growth,
minimize conflict among adjacent land uses, promote efficient use of land, protect
public health and safety, and reflect the five Guiding Principles.
Objectives:
a. Develop landowner-supported, neighborhood-specific strategies for land
utilization, development, and conservation.
b. Locate development in areas that are:
• physically suitable for development, and
• easily accessed by public services.
c. Keep development out of the floodplain and riparian areas.
d. Locate and design developments to maintain the water resource and water
rights (in accordance with state law).
e. Locate and design developments to be safe from natural disasters.
f. Locate and design developments in ways that preserve open space.
g. Expand affordable housing opportunities. Encourage projects that are well-
designed and accessible to public services. Avoid concentrations of lower-
income housing.

h. Discourage scattered rural residential development.
i. Discourage strip commercial development along arterial highways.
j. Discourage development in highly productive agricultural lands.
3.3.2 Goal 2. The Economy
Strengthen the major sectors of our local economy, and diversify the economic base.
Encourage the responsible development of natural resources.
Objectives:
a. Support growth in agriculture, forestry, mining, renewable energy, recreation
and tourism, retirement and senior-related services, entrepreneurial
enterprises, and construction activity.
b. Utilize and protect the resources which support these major economic
sectors.
c. Support the economic viability of family farms and ranches.
d. Acknowledge the economic value of the County’s fisheries, wildlife, and
wildlife habitat.
e. Promote public awareness of the importance of supporting existing local
businesses.
f. Promote new business and industry which are compatible with the major
economic sectors and do not put a financial strain on public services.
g. Expand the opportunities for year-round employment.
3.3.3 Goal 3. The Environment

Protect the quality of our air, groundwater, surface waters, soils, vegetation, fish and
wildlife habitat, scenic views, cultural and historic resources.
Objectives:
a. Promote best management practices by all land users.
b. Encourage new development that is compatible with the environmental goals
and objectives of this Plan.
c. Support the establishment, expansion, and upgrading of community
sewer/water systems.
d. Review new development proposals for the full spectrum of potential and
cumulative environmental impacts.
e. Where necessary, more clearly define the resources we want to protect.
f. Promote and support noxious weed control.
3.3.4 Goal 4. Recreation

Support a variety of recreational opportunities for both local residents and visitors.
Objectives:
a. Retain public access to public lands and waters.
b. Support opportunities to create additional public access in cooperation with
willing private landowners.

c. Minimize conflicts between recreationalists and private landowners.
d. Support opportunities for public/private land exchanges which will secure
high-value recreational resources for public use.
e. Recognize that recreationalists utilize local public services to a great extent.
3.3.5 Goal 5. Public Services
Provide high-quality public services to local residents and visitors in safe, fair, and
cost-effective ways.
Objectives:
a. Encourage new development to locate in areas which have ready access to
public services. Discourage new development which will put a financial strain
on public services and/or negatively influence the economy.
b. Maintain and improve County roads and bridges according to priorities which
are consistent with County land use policies.
c. Devise strategies to assess service users, including recreationalists, who are
not currently helping to pay for service costs.
d. Explore other sources of funds to support the provision of public services.
e. Support the community infrastructure improvements needed to entice new
development to locate close to existing towns and services.
3.3.6 Goal 6. Communication, Coordination, Citizen Participation (3C’s)

Growth brings changes in land use and service requirements to not only the most
rural parts of Madison County, but also its well-established communities.
Development in one area often affects another. A new commercial shopping center
outside of a town, for example, may affect not only rural residents and businesses,
but also the townspeople and merchants of the town itself. Similarly, a new
residential subdivision outside of a town may impact both adjacent private
landowners and nearby federal public lands.
Counties, towns, local service districts (e.g., fire, school), and state and federal land
managers can all benefit by planning for future changes in land use and public
service demands. The participation of local citizens in the planning process can
vastly enhance its ultimate value. Communication and coordinated efforts among all
affected parties are crucial. A sixth goal is therefore stated, with accompanying
objectives:
Goal 6: Promote an open, inclusive, and coordinated approach to planning for the
future in Madison County (Leadership in this regard will be provided by the County
Commissioners).

Objectives:
a. Consult with town officials and other local service providers on a regular
basis. As much as possible, support their efforts to plan and pay for future
growth and improve public services.
b. Meet regularly with state and federal land managers to discuss respective
land use plans, management strategies, and specific projects/project
proposals.
c. Maintain open communications with the public on planning and development
issues. Provide ample opportunity for local citizens to participate in planning
and plan implementation.
3.4 Land Development and Conservation/Utilization Policies
In addition to the Guiding Principles and set of goals and objectives, the following
policies will guide the future land use decisions of Madison County officials. Table
3-1 describes the policies related to new development. Policies related to land
conservation/utilization activities are described in Table 3-2. Guiding Principles
and/or Goals pertinent to each policy statement are identified.
Table 3-1 - New Development Policies

Pertinent
Policy Guiding
Wherever Possible, New Development Should:
# Principles and/or
Goals
Guiding Principle
#4.
Demonstrate existence of an adequate water supply
Land Use,
#1. within the development, to serve all proposed lots and
Economy,
land uses. The term applies to both domestic and fire-
Environment
related water storage and supply.
Goals.
Guiding Principle
Demonstrate that surface water and groundwater will not #2.
be degraded, according to state standards. Land Use,
#2.
Developments adjoining streams or lakes should use Economy,
appropriate best management practices to protect water Environment,
quality and riparian habitats. Recreation
Goals.
Guiding
Principles #1 &
Be located within areas that are reasonably accessible to
#3. #4. Land Use,
emergency services.
Public Services,
3C’s Goals.

Pertinent
Policy Guiding
# Principles and/or
Goals
Be legally and physically accessible by County or other Guiding

public roads that are maintained year-round and capable Principles #1 &
#4. of handling additional traffic. If not, new development #4. Land Use,
should pay for necessary road maintenance, construction Public Services
and reconstruction. Goals.
Be evaluated according to the fire risk rating factors

developed by the State of Montana (5) and the fire
Guiding Principle
management objectives listed in (6). Where new
#4.
#5 development falls into high-extreme risk categories, it
Land Use, Public
should be redesigned to reduce risk to the low level
Services Goals.
category. Include Madison County Subdivision Planning
Fire Protection Board and the local fire district in fire risk
evaluations.
Guiding
Be located, designed, and scaled to preserve productive
Principles #2 &
agricultural lands or any environmentally sensitive areas
#3. Land Use,
(e.g., riverbank, floodplain, critical watersheds, steep
Economy,
#6. slopes, erodible soils, animals/plants of special concern,
Environment,
important wildlife habitat). For example, a clustered
Recreation,
development design may be required in order to
Public Services
accomplish this.
Goals
Land Use,
Be designed and scaled to respect neighboring land
#7. Environment
uses, including historic resources.
Goals.
Guiding Principle
Be located, designed, and scaled to preserve scenic #2.
#8.
views and vistas from public lands and public rights-of- Economy,
way. Environment
Goals.
Economy,
#9. Be encouraged to retain traditional public access to
Recreation
public lands and waters.
Goals.
Guiding Principle
Uphold the Right-to-Farm protections afforded by
#10. #3. Land Use,
Montana State Statutes.
Economy Goals.

Pertinent
Policy Guiding
# Principles and/or
Goals
In the case of large-scale residential and mixed use Land Use,

#11. developments, contribute to a mix of housing Economy Goals.
opportunities and prices.
Guiding Principle
#3. Land Use,
Where agricultural land is being converted, encourage
#12. Economy,
the continuation of agricultural practices on the land.
Environment
Goals.
Economy,
Be evaluated for the cumulative impacts of development
Environment,
#13. upon area resources, including local economy and public
Public Services
services.
Goals.
In the case of land exchanges which put public lands into

private ownership, uses of a privately acquired exchange
tract should reflect the prevailing land use in the area
immediately surrounding the tract. The exchange of lands
should not trigger more intensive land use (e.g.,
#14. Land Use Goal.
residential development in an area of livestock grazing).
Similarly, privately held leases on public lands should not
introduce residential development into an area of
traditional resource-based use (e.g., agriculture, logging,
mining, outdoor recreation).
Involve consultation 1 with municipal officials during

project design and review stages, in the case of any Land Use, 3C’s
#15.
proposed development located within two miles of an Goals.
incorporated community.
Involve consultation 2 with appropriate local service Public Services,

#16.
districts during project design and review stages. 3C’s Goals.
1
Consultation means contact for the purposes of notification and information exchange.
2
See Footnote 1

Pertinent
Policy Guiding
# Principles and/or
Goals
Involve consultation 3 with appropriate land management

agencies during project design and review stages, in the
Land Use, 3C’s
#17. case of any proposed development located within two
Goals.
miles of public lands. Involve consultation with
appropriate resource management agencies as well.
Involve consultation 4 with potentially affected citizens, Land Use, 3C’s

#18. especially immediately adjacent landowners and Goals.
residents, during project design and review stages.
Include a land stewardship plan that addresses

management responsibility for such things as noxious Land Use,
#19. weed control, public access (where provided), wildlife, Environment
livestock grazing, other agricultural uses, recycling, and Goals.
protection of water resources.
Guiding Principle
Provide that transportation and utility improvements will
#3. Land Use,
#20. be made in a manner that maintains and supports, and
Economy, Public
does not negatively impact, the viability of agriculture.
Services Goals.
Table 3-2 - Land Conservation Policies

Pertinent
Policy Guiding
Land Conservation/Utilization Activities Should:
# Principles and/or
Goals
Be targeted towards productive agricultural lands, Guiding

important wildlife habitat, watershed protection including Principles #2 &
#1. river corridors and riparian areas, historic preservation, #3. Land Use,
areas of recreational opportunity, and scenic views and Environment
vistas. Goals.
3
See Footnote 1
4
See Footnote 1

Pertinent
Policy Guiding
Land Conservation/Utilization Activities Should:
# Principles and/or
Goals
Involve consultation with municipal officials or land

management agencies (if site is located within two miles
of their jurisdictional boundary), appropriate resource Land Use, Public
#2. management agencies, local service districts, and Services, 3C’s
potentially affected citizens. Consultation means contact Goals.
for the purposes of notification and information
exchange.
Include a land stewardship plan that addresses

management responsibility for such things as noxious Land Use,
#3. weed control, public access (where provided), wildlife, Environment
livestock grazing, other agricultural uses, recycling, and Goals.
protection of water resources.
3.5 Shared Community Values
The Shared Community Values are the things that bring people to Madison County,
support our economy, protect our future, and are our responsibility as good
stewards. All of the shared community values identified for the Madison Valley (2)
were considered “Very Important” by respondents to the questionnaire. Many of the
questionnaire responses noted how interrelated these values are; to lose one affects
others, and they all affect the quality of life in Madison County. Development should
enhance or support these values.
• Open Space
An area of land that is valued for natural processes and wildlife, for agriculture,
for active and passive recreation and/or for providing other public benefits.
• Wildlife
Healthy, diverse populations of wild animals living in a natural, undomesticated
state.
• Small Town Attributes

A close-knit feeling of community and relationships (people know each other by
name).
• Natural Beauty
Those qualities of the landscape which appeal to all our senses, but particularly
the visual and experiential. In general terms 'natural beauty' is simply interpreted
as what people see, experience and enjoy as they react to surroundings
unaffected by man.

• Ranching (Agriculture)
Successful, family owned and operated, farming and the raising of livestock that
promotes positive stewardship.
• Viewshed
The landscape visible from a particular viewpoint, with emphasis on the natural
environment.
• Outdoor Recreation and Public Land Access

Diversity of outdoor activities in settings that are easily accessible
• Healthy Economy, including good jobs and housing opportunities

Economy is diversified offering many goods and services, jobs that are valued
and sought after, and people can afford to live in decent, quality housing (that
doesn't exceed 30% of gross household income)
• Quality low impact development

Development that maintains and enhances the pre-development conditions
through proper site design and building techniques.
3.6 References
A complete compilation of the Growth Policy questionnaire results and input from the
public meetings held in Fall 2011/ Spring 2012 are on file in the Planning office (4).

4. Existing Characteristics
A summary profile of Madison County is presented below. For more detailed
information, refer to data sources.
4.1 Use of County Profile Information
In order to carry out these Land Development and Conservation/Utilization Policies,

Madison County officials and landowners should make full use of County profile
information, as it exists and as more data become available. Presently, this
information includes: historic resources, population/housing/economic data,
public/private land ownership, County subdivisions/certificates of survey, soil survey
data, flood-prone areas, big game winter range and overall distribution, animal and
plant species of special concern, current land uses (on private lands), conservation
easements, service district boundaries (e.g., schools, hospitals), emergency service
areas and response times, County road usage/conditions, highway traffic counts,
sand and gravel resources, development area, wind potential, wind energy, and
hazards.
Much of this data exists in mapped form. Several databases are electronically linked
to facilitate production of map overlays, which layer one type of information on top of
another, to assist in land evaluations. Databases are added into the County’s
electronic mapping system as they become available, increasing the value of the
overlays as tools for future area wide planning and development suitability analysis.
Although much of the data is scaled for regional-level planning rather than site-
specific development planning and design, the information can readily identify areas
where more extensive data-gathering is needed in order to determine a particular
site’s suitability for particular land uses.
Since the 1999 Plan Update (1) was prepared, the 2000 Census and 2010 Census
have been completed, with more current population, housing, income, and
employment data. Summary data is included in the following sections. In addition,
Madison County has progressed with its Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
mapping program and obtained more complete land use data. Additional land use
and natural resources information is also provided in the following sections, together
with a fuller description of existing local services and public facilities.
4.2 Madison County History
In the historic period Native Americans, predominately Shoshone and Bannock

tribes, occupied the Madison and Ruby valleys. There remains ample evidence of
lithics (arrowheads, scrapers, etc.) tepee rings, hearth sites scattered throughout the
county. Some areas such as Moffet Gulch and the Cashman Ridge quarry have
significant archeological importance. There were also small hunter/gatherer family
groups called Sheepeaters occupying the mountain ranges. In the early half of the

nineteenth century several tribes utilized routes in Madison County to travel on
annual hunting trips to hunt buffalo east of the continental divide. The Cherry Creek
Indian Trail connecting the Madison Valley to the Gallatin Valley is marked and on
the state historic register. Native American presence and occupation in Madison
Valley diminished greatly during the early mining era of the 1860's. Many of the
Indians were removed to Fort Hall and other reservations and they were essentially
gone by the last decades of the nineteenth century.
The Lewis and Clark expedition passed through a corner of Madison County in 1805
and many trappers passed through and temporarily resided in the county during the
fur trapping era.
When gold was discovered in Alder Gulch in 1863 the population dramatically
increased. Within a year over 10,000 miners were working gold deposits in the
county. The decades following gold discovery saw booms in placer mining and hard
rock quartz mining involving tunneling and crushing the ore by stamp mills. Hydraulic
mining flourished for a period, involving numerous ditches to convey water, and later
in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, dredges worked along Alder
Creek, Washington Creek and Norwegian Creek. Mining has diminished but is still a
continuing activity in the county. Madison County has a myriad of mining remains
such as tailing piles, mine shafts, ditches, stamp mills, old buildings, and spoil piles
from the dredges.
Stock growing and agriculture began in the 1860's to support the miners and
continues to this day. The county was a major sheep and horse producer in earlier
decades, but gradually has changed to mostly cattle production.
The Madison National Forest was created in 1902 and in 1931 merged into the
Beaverhead and now Beaverhead/Deerlodge National Forest. These public lands
which comprise nearly half of the county have supported grazing, logging, mining,
hunting, fishing and other recreational pastimes in the county since their beginning.
The Madison Valley was an early route for tourists traveling to Yellowstone National
Park in the 1880's and this pattern continues with ever increasing numbers. The
county has a long history of recreational businesses such as dude ranches, hunting
outfitters and fly fishing guides. Virginia City and the Lewis and Clark Caverns State
Park are more recent tourist attractions.
Madison County was first established in the Territory of Idaho, in 1864. Later that
year Madison County became part of Montana Territory when it was created. For a
brief period Virginia City was the Territorial Capital. Madison County was the first
county in the state to establish a County Planning Board.
4.3 Population
• 7,691 people called Madison County home in 2010, a 12% increase in the
year-round population between 2000 and 2010 (see Table 4-1, Figure 4-1).
In addition, the number of seasonal residents and annual visitors has
increased.
• The County’s year-round population growth slowed to 1.3% per year
between 2000 and 2010 from the 1.5% growth rate experience between
1990 and 2000. Net migration accounts for the vast majority of this growth
(see Table 4-2).
• Approximately two-thirds of County residents live in rural areas; one-third
live in towns.
• Virginia City, the county seat, was the only incorporated town that increased
in population between 2000 and 2010. Ennis is the largest town in the
County, with a population of 838 in 2010.
• Between 1970 and 2010, the percentage of Madison County’s younger
population (under 19) declined to about 20%. In 2010, there were slightly
more males than females in most age groups (see Figure 4-2).
Table 4-1 - Population by Area in Madison County, 1990-2010

Population 5 2000 - 2010 1990-2000
Change Change
2010 2000 1990 Growth Growth
# % # %
Madison Rate Rate
County 7,691 6,851 5,989 840 12.3% 1.3% 862 14.4% 1.5%
Alder 103 116 N/A (13) -11.2% -1.3% N/A
Ennis* 838 840 773 (2) -0.2% 0.0% 67 8.7% 0.9%
Harrison 137 162 N/A (25) -15.4% -1.8% N/A
Pony 118 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sheridan* 642 659 652 (17) -2.6% -0.3% 7 1.1% 0.1%
Twin
375 400 374 (25) -6.3% -0.7% 26 7.0% 0.7%
Bridges*
Virginia
190 130 142 60 46.2% 4.3% (12) -8.5% -1.0%
City*
* Indicates incorporated town N/A: Not Available
Data Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
Table 4-2 - Components of Residential Population Change

Madison County and Montana
Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change 4/1/2000 to 7/1/2009
Total Vital Events Net Migration
Geographic
Population Natural Inter-
Area Births Deaths Total Domestic
Change Increase national
Montana 72,799 31,184 108,579 77,395 42,980 3,042 39,938
Madison
County 604 -200 481 681 843 -10 853
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, March 2010
5
The Census count of population refers only to persons who claim Madison County as their primary
residence. It does not include seasonal residents.

Figure 4-1 - Historic Population, 1890-2010

Figure 4-2 - Madison County 2010 Population by Gender and Age Group
4.4 Land
• Madison County contains 2.3 million acres, or 3,587 square miles of land
(and 16 square miles of waterbody).
• Several mountain ranges and associated “intermontane” (between-the-
mountains) basins dominate the topography.
• Madison County lies within the Intermountain Seismic Belt, which is the
most seismically active area within Montana.
• Several types of minerals are present, including gold, garnet, talc and
chlorite. Madison County also contains extensive deposits of sand and
gravel.
• Soil types vary widely and support a variety of vegetation and land uses.
• 109,000 acres of private land are classified by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service as prime farmland.

4.5 Land Status and Use
• Madison County contains about 46% federal land, 6% state land, and 48%
private land.
• In 2012, 96% of the private lands in Madison County were classified either
agricultural or timber land for tax assessment purposes. The breakdown
was 77% grazing, 9% cropland/hay ground, and 7% timber.
• In 2012, approximately 164,700 acres in Madison County were subdivided;
24,700 acres in subdivisions (7% of total private land) with another 140,000
acres divided into parcels by the certificate of survey process. Most of the
recent subdivision activity has been in the Madison Valley and at Big Sky.
• Of the 3,845 total subdivision lots in Madison County outside of the
incorporated towns in July, 2012, about 37% (1,423) of these lots were built
on, with 63% (2,422) undeveloped.
• As of July 1, 2012, conservation easements were in effect on approximately
301,820 acres of private ground (29% of total private land).
4.6 Land Use and Natural Resources
Since 1999, Madison County has gathered and mapped additional information
regarding land use, development, and development suitability in various parts of the
County. A build-out study 6 completed in the spring of 2001 provided County
officials with a clearer understanding of the existing development pattern and the
potential for future development (7). That study estimated that 34% of the 9,911
parcels mapped included one or more improvements. 7 Less than 3% of the
unimproved parcels were completely covered by one or more physical constraints to
development. 8
Using the County’s GIS system, the January 2012 parcel data layer was searched
for privately owned parcels, outside of incorporated areas, which contained Plat
Book 4 or Certificate of Survey (COS) Book 7 in the legal description to create an
approximation of subdivisions. The resulting coverage is shown in Figure 4-3. As
shown in Table 4-3, about 15% of the private land in Madison County has been
6
The buildout study covered only those areas of the county for which two databases
existed at the time: (1) parcel data from the Montana Department of Revenue; and
(2) tax roll data. Not included in the study were the Big Sky, Silver Star, North
Meadow Creek, and upper South Boulder areas.
7
Most commonly, "improvement” means a residence, but it can also mean an
agricultural building or commercial establishment. The buildout study characterized
a parcel as “improved” even if there was only one improvement on a 640-acre
section of ground.
8
Physical constraints examined include riparian vegetation, high water table, high
probability of flooding, and >25% slope.
subdivided 9, with approximately 63% of the parcels considered available for
development.
Land divisions occur in three major ways: (1) by filing a certificate of survey to create
tracts of 160 acres or greater; (2) through the local subdivision process, to create
tracts less than 160 acres in size; and (3) by creating tracts less than 160 acres for
the purposes of family transfer 10. Recent divisions of land into tracts less than 160
acres are summarized in Table 4-4.
Table 4-3 - Parcels Created through Subdivision & Certificates of Survey

# Lots Available
% Private Land # Lots/Parcels # Acres
for Building
Subdivision 2% 3,845 24,725 2,422
COS 13% 2,871 141,010 1,757
TOTAL 11 1,047,858 acres 6,716 lots 165,785 acres 4,179 lots
Source: Montana Cadastral Layer through June 2012
Table 4-4 - Madison County Land Division Activity Summary

Subdivision # Lots Acres
Fiscal Year # Approved
Method Created 12 Divided
Subdivision 19 338 5,088
1999-00
Family Transfer 7 7 *
2000-01 Subdivision 18 260 764
Subdivision 6 21 246
2001-02
2002-03 13
Family Transfer 7 19 267
2003-04
2004-05
Family Transfer 19 43 1,096
2005-06
2006-07
Family Transfer 34 80 1,346
9
Area excludes property located within incorporated towns.
10
Montana State law allows a landowner to create and deed new tracts of land to immediate family
members, as long as the purpose of such land transfers is not to evade the local subdivision review
process.
11
Outside of incorporated towns.
12
Includes lots, tracts, condo units, and RV spaces
13
Partial year data – from September 23, 2002.

Subdivision # Lots Acres
Fiscal Year # Approved
Method Created 12 Divided
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10 Subdivision 7 71 357
Subdivision 3 8 87
2010-11
Subdivision 3 38 77.9
2011-12
* Previous years not readily available
Sources: Madison County Clerk & Recorder’s Office and Madison County Planning
Conservation easements have been widely used in Madison County, especially the
Madison Valley, as a tool for voluntary land conservation and preservation of natural
resources, productive agricultural lands, and wildlife habitat. Approximately 200,000
acres of privately owned land in Madison County are under conservation easement.
Recent conservation easement activity is summarized in Table 4-5.
Table 4-5 - Summary of Recorded Conservation Easements in Madison

County, 2000-2011
YEAR
TOTAL
Area of County 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11
Beaverhead Valley 0
Big Hole Valley 1 1
Big Sky 1 1
Jefferson Valley
(Twin Bridges – 1 1 1 1 1 5
Harrison)
Madison Valley 4 2 4 5 2 7 3 6 3 3 2 3 41
Ruby Valley 3 3 1 3 3 1 2 4 1 2 23
TOTAL 9 5 6 9 6 8 6 11 3 4 2 5 71
Sources: Madison County Clerk and Recorder’s Office, Madison County Planning Office.
Roads, waterways, parcels, conservation easements, public/private land ownership,

structures and wells in Madison County mapped in 2006 were revised and included
in the current map series, located at the end of this chapter:
Figure 4-3 - Subdivisions
Figure 4-4 - Development
Figure 4-5 - Water Resources
Figure 4-6 - Wind Speed
Figure 4-7 - Wind Power

Figure 4-8 - Noxious Weeds on Public Lands
Figure 4-9- Sand and Gravel Resources
Figure 4-10 - Emergency Response – Ambulance
Figure 4-11 - Emergency Response – Fire
Figure 4-12 - Emergency Response - Law Enforcement
Figure 4-13 - Big Game Summer Range
Figure 4-14 - Big Game Winter Range
Figure 4-15 - Forest Species Linkage
Figure 4-16 - Species of Concern
Figure 4-17 - Wildland - Urban Interface
Figure 4-18 - Potential Hazards
Figure 4-19 - Agricultural Land
Oversized maps of County data layers are available from the Madison County GIS
Office.
4.7 Jobs
• Agriculture, retail trade, and services are the three largest employment
sectors in the County. Farm and ranch employment has been declining as a
percentage of total employment since 1970 while retail trade and services
employment percentage of total employment has grown.
• Nonfarm sectors of the economy are the main sources of new jobs,
especially construction, retail trade, and services.
• Major private employers include (listed in alphabetical order): A.M. Welles,
Big Sky Resort, Madison Foods, Madison Valley Hospital, Moonlight Basin
Ranch, R.L. Winston Rod Company, Ruby Valley Hospital, Yellowstone
Club, Yellowstone Mine, YMC Public Safety & Privacy Inc (see Table 4-6).
• Major public employers include: local school districts, municipalities, and
conservation districts, Madison County (including two nursing homes), state
and federal governments, Madison Valley Hospital, Ruby Valley Hospital.
• Employment supporting tourism and recreation, especially in the Big Sky
area, have become more important to Madison County’s economy.
Table 4-6 - Top 10 employers in Madison County

EMPLOYMENT SIZE CLASS CODE
Business Name 4th Quarter 2009 1st Quarter 2012

A.M. Welles, Inc. 5 8
Big Sky Resort 8 7*
CP of Bozeman 5 -
First Madison Valley Bank 4 -
Madison Foods - 5
Madison Valley Hospital 5 5

EMPLOYMENT SIZE CLASS CODE
Business Name 4th Quarter 2009 1st Quarter 2012

Moonlight Basin Ranch 7 5
R L Winston - 5
Ruby Valley Hospital 4 4
Yellowstone Club 8 7*
Yellowstone Mine - 4
YMC Public Safety & Privacy Inc. 5 4
* Top 100 private employers in State
Employment Size Class Code: 9 = 1000+ employees; 8 =500-999 employees; 7
=250-499 employees; 6 =100-249 employees; 5 =50-99 employees; 4 =20-49
Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry, Quarterly Census of
Employment and Wages Program
4.8 Income
• In 2010, Madison County’s per capita income of $34,383 was 97% of the
state average and 86% of the national average. Between 2000 and 2010,
dividends, interest, and rent decreased from 33% to 29% of total personal
income. In that same period, the percentage of total personal income
attributable to earnings increased from 49% to 51%.14
• The leading industries in Madison County between 2004-2009 were
agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining (20 percent) and
educational services, health care, and social assistance (15 percent). The
most common occupations were management/professional (37%); service
(18%); sales/office (17%); construction, maintenance, repair (14%);
production, transportation, material moving (6%). Private wage and salary
workers represented 63% of those employed, followed by 20% self-
employed 15.
• Agriculture represents a decreasing portion of employment, with the greatest
growth in the services and construction industries 16.
• About of one-third of the spending by hunters and fishermen statewide is in
Region 3 (Beaverhead, Broadwater, Gallatin, Jefferson, Lewis & Clark,
Madison, Park, Silver Bow and part of Deer Lodge Counties) 17. In 2008,
Montana resident and non-resident big game hunters spent an estimated
$66.2 million in Region 3. In 2007, fishermen spent $80.8 million in Region
3.
14
Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce, BEARFACTS
15
American Community Survey 2005
16
MSU Billings, Montana Economic and Demographic Databook, June 2005
17
Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, 2008 Hunter/Angler Use and Expenditure Fact Sheet (July 2009)

• Madison County’s unemployment rate of 7.5% exceeded the Montana
unemployment rate of 6.9% in 2010 (see Table 4-7).
Table 4-7 - Income and Employment

Madison County Montana
% %
2005 2010 2005 2010
Change Change
Per Capita
$24,715 $34,383 +39.1% $27,657 $35,399 +28.0%
Income
Annual Average
$21,907 $29,024 +32.5% $27,721 $34,610 +24.9%
Wage
Unemployment
3.1% 7.5% +4.4% 4.0% 6.9% +2.9%
Rate
Total
4,110 3,322 -19.2% 493,407 419,239 -15.0%
Employment
Sources: Census and Economic Information Center, MT Dept. of Commerce. Also,
MT Dept. of Labor and Industry – Research and Analysis Bureau
4.9 Housing
• 6,940 total housing units were counted in Madison County during the 2010
Census. Almost half of these units were vacant, with 2,899 units (41.8%)
identified as seasonal, recreational or occasional use units.
• Of the 3,560 occupied units, about 75% were owner-occupied.
• About 75% of the housing units are classified as single-family.
• Most new housing units in the County outside of Big Sky and the
incorporated towns are on individual sewer and water systems.
• The median value of owner-occupied housing units on 10 acres or less
(2006-2010) was $240,100, about 30% higher than the statewide average.
Concern about a lack of affordable housing is widespread.
• The most appropriate areas for affordable workforce housing are areas in
close proximity to services and jobs. These areas are shown in Figure 4-4.
Table 4-8 - 2010 Housing Data

Housing Units Vacancy Rate
Seasonal or
Total Occupied Vacant Owner Rental
Recreational
Madison Co. 6,940 3,560 3,380 3.2% 10.3% 41.8%
Madison Valley
3,881 1,460 2,421 4.7% 13.7% 57.0%
(Census Tract 1)
Twin Bridges-Harrison
1,688 1,144 544 2.3% 7.1% 23.2%
(Census Tract 2)
Sheridan-Alder
1,371 956 415 2.1% 8.1% 21.7%
(Census Tract 3)
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census

4.10 Public Finance, Public Services
• Mining operations paid $893,439 in net proceeds tax to Madison County in

2011.
• Madison County received $639,238 in PILT (payment-in-lieu-of-taxes for tax
exempt federal land) money in 2012.
• Residential real estate is the largest direct contributor to the County tax base.
• Education receives the largest share of the County resident’s property tax
dollar. In recent years, voters in Harrison, Twin Bridges, and Sheridan school
districts have approved special mill levies.
• Since the Initiative 105 (I-105) cap on mill levies was imposed in 1986, Madison
County voters have approved special levies for the County nursing homes,
County weed control program, rural fire district services, park districts and
cemetery districts.
• Many emergency service providers fear they will not have sufficient resources
to meet the future demands of a growing population.
Madison County residents and visitors depend upon local services provided by both
public and private entities. Key service providers include:
• County Commissioners office
• County road department
• County law enforcement (includes 911, search and rescue)
• County sanitation/floodplain administration/solid waste management office
• County weed office
• County planning office
• County office of emergency management
• County GIS/IT office
• County grant writing office
• Two County nursing homes
• County public health program
• County fair board office
• County extension office
• County library (and three town libraries)
• County airport board
• County superintendent of schools and local school districts
• County clerk & recorder’s office
• County treasurer’s office
• County attorney, justice of peace, and clerk of court
• District court
• County juvenile probation and other social services programs
• County office of public assistance
• County appraisal/assessment office
• Local Emergency Planning Committee

• Other County personnel and citizen advisory boards
• Local fire districts and quick response units
• Two hospital districts
• Two ambulance service organizations
• Local conservation districts
• Utility companies
• Local municipalities
• Local sewer and water districts
• Local post offices
• Local chambers of commerce
• Big Sky Owners Association
• US Bureau of Land Management
• US Fish and Wildlife Service
• US Forest Service
• US Natural Resources and Conservation Service
• Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
• Big Sky Public Safety and Privacy (Yellowstone Club)
• Other state and federal agencies
The public service providers listed above utilize and maintain a wide spectrum of
public facilities to fulfill their respective duties. Public facilities are those:
• buildings and grounds (such as the courthouse, fairgrounds, nursing homes,
solid waste disposal sites),
• public works (including roads, bridges, sewer and water systems),
• vehicles and equipment (e.g., patrol cars, road maintenance vehicles, weed
spraying rigs, computers) that are publicly owned and operated to serve the
citizens of Madison County.
4.11 Public Facilities

4.11.1 Schools
In October 2011, 864 students were enrolled in Madison County’s 5 school
districts, 32 students in home schools (Table 4-9).
The school districts are governed by elected school boards who prepare their
individual district budgets.
Table 4-9 - Madison County School Enrollment, October 2011

School District Enrollment Home School
Alder (K-6) 26 3
Sheridan (K-12) 156 15 (elementary)
Twin Bridges (K-12) 253 4
Harrison (K-12) 96 1
Ennis (k-12) 333 9
TOTAL 864 32
Source: Madison County Superintendent of Schools

4.11.2 Transportation
• Madison County has an estimated 1200 miles of County road. School bus
routes and other heavily traveled County roads generally receive highest
priority for maintenance and snow removal by County road crews. Road
and bridge improvements in all three road districts are needed, to varying
degrees.
• Between 1999 and 2009, the traffic counts along state and federal highways
showed increases on all segments except MT 287 between Ennis and
Virginia City. Commercial vehicle traffic also increased on all segments,
except on MT 287 between Ennis and Twin Bridges. Some of the
increase in commercial traffic can be attributed to alternate routes used
during reconstruction of US 191 in Gallatin County.
• Major highways, secondary roads, and bridges are regularly evaluated by
the Montana Department of Transportation to identify needs for
rehabilitation, reconstruction, and paving. Projects proposed for funding
are shown in the five-year State Transportation Improvement Program,
which is updated annually.
• Madison County owns two airports. The Madison County Airport Board is
exploring the need for improvements at the Twin Bridges Airport. The Big
Sky Airport southeast of Ennis recently lengthened the runway to
accommodate private jet traffic; extending the taxiway the full length is
being considered. Both airports are lighted. Airport plans have been
completed (8).
• Madison County has limited transmission lines and pipelines.
4.12 Natural Resources

4.12.1 Water
• Water is an important resource. Madison County contains all or part of
several intermontane drainage basins. Water supply varies from basin to
basin, and within each basin. Factors which determine the availability of
groundwater and surface water at any particular location include its
hydrogeological character, climate, and land uses in the vicinity.
• Most residents rely on groundwater for drinking water and other household
purposes. It is also used for livestock and irrigation purposes.
• Surface water supports irrigation practices, fish and other wildlife
populations, and recreational activities.
• The Jefferson-Madison and Upper Missouri are closed basins, so no new
water rights may be appropriated (with exceptions for certain uses).
• The floodplains associated with Madison County’s rivers and streams serve
many functions, including wildlife habitat, aquifer recharge, and the
subirrigation of hayfields. An estimated 36,300 acres in the County are
considered flood-prone. This includes both land area and river channels.
• The Montana Department of Environmental Quality’s list of water quality-
impaired stream segments includes 69 water bodies in Madison County.
Identified problem sources include: agricultural/logging/mining practices,
road/bridge/dam construction, roadway maintenance and runoff, septic
tanks, land development, removal of riparian vegetation, streambank
modification, and natural causes. The impaired streams are mapped in
Figure 4-5 - Water Resources.
4.12.2 Mineral
Gold was discovered in Alder Gulch in 1863.
The primary economic minerals in Madison County are gold, garnet, talc,
sand and gravel.
Mine tailings and placer deposits have been reworked to recover additional
gold. The tailings are shipped to the Golden Sunlight operation in Jefferson
County.
There were 572 abandoned mine sites in 2011. 18
4.12.3 Air
Madison County has no air quality non-attainment areas, though the air
quality may be adversely affected by smoke from wildfires within and outside
of the county.
4.12.4 Wind Energy
The wind speed and wind energy in Madison County are mapped in Figure
4-6 and Figure 4-7.
Several companies began investigating wind energy beginning in the mid-
2000’s through data-collection meteorological towers.
One company has received approval to construct 8 wind turbines in the Norris
Hill area, though no towers have been constructed.
Madison County adopted an ordinance in 2003, revised in 2011, to establish
general standards, review criteria and a process for considering towers of
100’ or more in height (9).
4.12.5 Weed Management
• The spread of noxious weeds has become an increasing economic and
environmental threat. An estimated 87,000 acres in Madison County are
infested with spotted and/or diffused knapweed. Another 50,000 acres
are infested with leafy spurge.
• Curly leaf pondweed was detected in 2010 in Ennis Lake east of Clute’s
Landing. The plant is being monitored to determine its movement and
density for future development of a management strategy.
• Eurasian water milfoil has been found in the Jefferson River at the Cardwell
Bridge. The source of the infestation is tied to a large infestation in the
Jefferson Slough in Jefferson County. Management for this plant is
ongoing.
• Noxious weeds on public lands are shown in Figure 4-8.
• Madison County has adopted an integrated weed management plan (10).
18
Montana Department of Environmental Quality Abandoned Mines Inventory Sites

4.12.6 Soils
The principal source for soils information is the US Natural Resource and
Conservation Service. The information once found in printed books is now
available electronically.
4.12.7 Sand and Gravel Resources
As shown in Figure 4-9, the highest potential for sand and gravel is found in
the river valleys. Gravel pit locations have been mapped.
The sand and gravel resources are generally located in proximity to their use
location.
4.13 Emergency Response Times
As shown in Figure 4-10, Figure 4-11, Figure 4-12, much of Madison County is
outside of the 45-minute emergency response times for ambulance, fire and law
enforcement. Seasonal road closures, weather conditions, and road conditions will
increase response times beyond those mapped. The mapped emergency response
times include dispatch and turnout times.
4.14 Fish and Wildlife
• The lands and waters of Madison County support abundant fish and wildlife.
Agricultural lands have increasingly provided important habitat for a
variety of species.
• Population levels of different species have fluctuated over the past decade.
The big game winter range and summer range have been mapped in
Figure 4-13 and Figure 4-14.
• The Forest Species Linkages mapped in Figure 4-15 as suitable habitat for
grizzly and wolverine are expected to provide linkage habitat for species
that use similar habitats, such as black bear, fisher, and lynx. Locations
where species of concern may be found are shown in Figure 4-16.
• The Crucial Area Planning System (CAPS) developed by Montana Fish
Wildlife and Parks has species information statewide at the one-mile-
square scale. Areas are rated on their relative importance on a statewide
basis.
• WildPlanner is a tool developed by the Craighead Institute in partnership
with others that can be used to evaluate development scenarios, including
building location, on wildlife habitat and connectivity. This tool translates
information used by wildlife biologists into impacts that can be assessed
by developers, landowners and planners.
4.15 Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)
Madison County adopted a Strategic Wildland Fire Plan in 2003 (6). The
Community Wildfire Protection Plan, currently underway by Madison County
Emergency Services, will update much of the information in the 2003 plan. Figure
4-17shows the current wildland urban interface and fuel loads. As required by 76-

13-104(8), MCA, the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation
has adopted administrative rules that address development within the WUI (5).
4.16 Hazards
The manmade and natural hazards have been mapped in Figure 4-18. These
hazards include faults, flooding, avalanche, steep slopes, soils with shrink-swell
hazards, soils made up of landslide deposits, roads with potential traffic hazards,
dams, and landfills.
4.17 Agriculture and Open Space
Water, soil and acreage are important in identifying land with agricultural potential.
Figure 4-19 shows the main irrigation ditches, prime farmland, farmland of local
importance, conservation easements and tracts of 600+ acres.
4.18 Recreation (districts, facilities, public lands)
• There are three recreation districts in Madison County. The Sheridan and
Twin Bridges district boundaries are the same as their respective school
districts. Big Sky Mountain is a companion district to the Big Sky Meadow
district in Gallatin County.
• Madison County leases ground to the Madison Meadows Golf and Tennis
Club.
• Local civic, cultural and recreation groups have developed public-use
facilities, including parks, trails and museums.
• State and federal agencies maintain fishing access sites, campgrounds,
parking areas, trails and roads on their property.

4.19 Maps
Roads, waterways, parcels, conservation easements, public/private land ownership,

structures and wells in Madison County mapped in 2006 were revised and included
in the current map series, located at the end of this chapter:
Figure 4-9- Sand and Gravel Resources
Oversized maps of County data layers are available from the Madison County GIS
Office.
4.19.1 Disclaimer
All map boundaries are approximate and cannot be used for legal purposes. The
data shown on the maps is not the official record and may not be accurate or
complete. The maps are composed of various data layers at various scales. The
maps are for general planning purposes and are not intended to be used for
individual properties. Poster-sized versions of the map at a scale of 1:150,000 with
more information are available.
4.19.2 Updates
The maps shown in this document are as accurate and complete as possible. The
map content may change over time as the information used to create the layers is
revised, amended, or updated, and as additional map layers are created.







Figure 4-9 - Sand and Gravel Resources











5. Projected Trends
5.1 Population
Madison County has shown consistent population growth in every decade since
1970 (see Figure 5-1). Growth ranged from 9% during the 1970s, to 10% in the
1980s, to 14.4% in the 1990s. Projections of population growth prepared at the time
of the 2000 Census anticipated that Madison County would grow at 9% per decade
(1% annually) between 2000 and 2020, yet the County’s actual population growth
between 2000 and 2010 was 12.3%. The annual growth rates in the decades
between 1970 and 2010 varied from a low of 0.9% (1970-80) to a high of 1.5%
(1990-2000), averaging 1.1% per year over those 4 decades. Population projections
to 2030 were prepared using 3 annual growth rate scenarios: high (1.5%); likely
(1.2%); and low (1.0%). These annual growth rates give us a Madison County
population between 9,018 and 9,760; with the most likely population being 9,308
(see Figure 5-2).
A variety of data sources suggest that seasonal residents will continue to play a
significant role in Madison County’s growth and development pattern. The 2000
Census described 67% of the vacant housing stock in Madison County as seasonal
or recreational; in 2010 approximately 41.8% of the vacant housing was seasonal or
recreational. As an indicator of high seasonal population, about 63% of Madison
County’s private properties list a permanent address outside of Madison County.
Continuing development in the Big Sky resort community and the Madison Valley
area remain tailored to buyers who are unlikely to make Madison County their
primary residence. All such information suggests a continued influx of seasonal
residents to Madison County.
Over the past decade, the local communities of Twin Bridges, Sheridan, Virginia
City, Ennis, and Big Sky have stepped up their efforts to market the area for tourism
and outdoor recreation opportunities. It is likely that the number of visitors to
Madison County each year will also rise.
5.2 Land Use and Natural Resources
A growth projection model developed by the Sonoran Institute depicts the trend in
residential development for Madison County. From 1995 to 2005, the number of
homes increased by 41%. The projected growth between 2005 and 2015 is 27%.
Projected growth between 2015 and 2025 is 22% 19, as shown in Figure 5-3. The
Sonoran model suggested a slow-down in overall development in the County,
19
Patty Gude, researcher who prepared the growth model for the Sonoran Institute, has indicated
that the model offers a conservative prediction of growth for Madison County.

though the slow-down did not start until about 2008-2009. The geographical
distribution of this new growth is depicted in Figure 5-4.
A forecast of residential development by Fire District area recognizes a slower

growth rate in the early years of the forecast period, with a moderate increase in the
rate as the economy improves (see Table 5-1).
For the past three decades, the Big Sky area has been a growth center in Madison
County for both jobs and housing. Based on the County-approved master plans for
four major developments (Boyne USA, Moonlight Basin Ranch, Spanish Peaks
Resort, and Yellowstone Club), this resort community is clearly slated for continued
growth.
Concerted efforts to both conserve and efficiently utilize natural resources will
continue through this decade. Local watershed groups will fine tune and implement
their drought management plans, in an effort to maintain the health of both
agriculture and fisheries. Monitoring water quality and addressing problem areas will
remain a focus of local conservation districts. The Montana Bureau of Mines and
Geology has started a groundwater characterization study in Madison County. This
study should help County officials and landowners better understand the capacity of
groundwater resources in different parts of the County to support growth.
In recent years, both public agencies and private citizens have become better
informed about the environmental and economic threat posed by noxious weeds.
Over the next 5-10 years, Madison County will continue to be an area where
aggressive, cooperative actions by government and private landowners are taken to
control spread and prevent new infestations.
While options for the purchase of conservation easements remain limited, a

combination of PDR (purchase of development rights) and voluntary donations is
expected to continue.
A new addition to this growth policy is the inclusion of sand and gravel resources.
Most of the County’s sand and gravel resources are in the river valleys, which is also
where the bulk of the development has been occurring. The supply of sand and
gravel resource appears to be adequate for the foreseeable future.
Wind is a relatively new potential energy resource for Madison County. The County
adopted Ordinance 1-2003 establishing a permitting process for wireless
communication facilities and wind energy conversion systems. This ordinance,
modified in 2011, addresses the potential impacts to be considered for towers of 100
feet or more in height (9). Several companies have expressed interest in developing
the resource, particularly in the Norris Hill area. One 8-tower project, as yet unbuilt,
has been approved. Factors affecting wind energy include wind speed, wind power,
and proximity to transmission lines. The wind speed and power for Madison County
are shown in Figure 4-6 and Figure 4-7.

Figure 5-1 - Madison County Population, 1890-2010

Figure 5-2 - Madison County Population Projection

Figure 5-3 - Observed and Forecasted Development in Madison County

Figure 5-4 - 2025 Forecast Growth Areas

Table 5-1 - Residential Unit Growth by Fire District (September 2010 Estimate)
Residential Lots Developed Change 2010-2030 Available Lots 20
Fire District 2010 2015 2025 2030 # Lots % Change Buildout 21 % Buildout 22 2010 2030
AlderFD 230 232 242 245 15 6.40% 909 27% 679 664
BigSkyFD 1960 2299 3612 4914 2954 150.70% 6568 75% 4608 1654
HarrisonFD 505 510 530 537 32 6.40% 1798 30% 1293 1261
JVVFD 107 108 112 114 7 6.40% 320 36% 213 206
MVRFD 1861 1952 2091 2118 257 13.80% 3556 60% 1695 1438
SheridanFD 492 517 537 548 56 11.40% 854 64% 362 306
TBFD 497 502 522 529 32 6.40% 1070 49% 573 541
Unassigned 81 82 85 86 5 6.40% 824 10% 743 738
VCFD 64 65 67 68 4 6.40% 185 37% 121 117
Towns 924 974 1074 1024 100 10.80% 2786 37% 1862 1762
6721 7240 8874 10182 3461 51.50% 18870 54% 12149 10718
Annual Growth Rate 1.90% 2.10% 2.80% 1.44%
Source: Planning Department Estimates
Assumptions:
1. Growth rate starts slow (from 1% in the first year to 1.8% in year 5). Growth rate increases to 2.3% by 2017.
2. Allocation assumptions: Growth will be greatest in closest proximity to services (Big Sky, Ennis, Sheridan, Twin
Bridges), including water and sewer; Big Sky – at 75% buildout in 2030; Sheridan – proportionally more residential
development in the town in 2015 as sewer/water improvements are made; Areas with already subdivided smaller lots (up
to 10 acres) more attractive than larger parcels; Demographic changes/aging population; Economic concerns/available
finances; Big Sky lots – based on approved ODPs/master plans
20
Undeveloped residential lots – privately owned lots free of conservation easements or addressed structure; estimate 60% of undeveloped town
lots are residential.
21
Maximum number of lots available
22
% of lots built on by 2030

5.3 Housing
The lack of affordable housing for Madison County’s low and moderate income
households has been consistently identified as a problem in recent need
assessments conducted by local municipalities (in preparing their own growth
policies) and the Headwaters Resource Conservation and Development District (in
preparing a regional CEDS --Community Economic Development Strategy –
document (11)). Only a limited amount of rental housing has been constructed, and
home ownership has become unattainable for most young singles or couples. The
demand for affordable housing is expected to grow more pressing in the next five
years. In response, a Madison County Housing Needs Assessment and Five-Year
Plan was prepared and is hereby incorporated by reference into this growth policy
(12). The Plan aims at addressing current and future needs for senior housing,
rental housing, and expanded homeownership opportunities.
As shown in Figure 5-5, the census found approximately 49% of the housing units in
Madison County were vacant. Of these, 86% were defined as recreational, seasonal
or occasional use. This trend is expected to continue as development continues in
Big Sky.
Figure 5-5 - Madison County - 2010 Vacant Housing Units

5.4 Income and Employment
Madison County’s per capita personal income steadily increased from 1969 to 2010,
except for a dip in 2009 (see Figure 5-6). Although historically below Montana’s per
capita personal income, Madison County has been above or approximately even
with the state level since 2004.
Like much of the Rocky Mountain West, Madison County is experiencing a transition
from traditional resource-based industries to an increasing number and variety of
services, including tourism and outdoor recreation. Expansion of the ski resort and
golf course sectors at Big Sky will generate significant employment growth in the
regional outdoor recreation industry for the foreseeable future. The construction
industry grew substantially during the high-growth years. The growth by industry
from 1970 to 2030 is shown in Figure 5-7. Farm self-employment is expected to
stay at about the same level through 2030 (see Figure 5-8), but it will represent a
decreasing proportion of the employment in the county (see Figure 5-9) as wage and
salary employment increases.
5.5 Local Services and Public Facilities
Population and residential growth generates greater demand for local services such
as fire and police protection, ambulance and hospital services, utility connections,
road maintenance and education. As community cost-of-services studies have
shown, growth does not always translate into sufficient tax revenue or user fees to
meet the public service needs of the population. In Madison County, recent surveys
of local emergency service providers have consistently identified a need for newer
vehicles and equipment and, in some cases, additional personnel. Yet sufficient
funds are not available.
A Fiscal Impact Analysis comparing the cost of providing road and fire services and
the taxes collected for the property was completed in 2010 (3). This analysis
emphasized the relationship between locating development near services and the
County’s ability to pay for those services in the future.
The demand for most local services comes not just from full-time permanent
residents, but also from seasonal residents and visitors. Given the projections of
continued population growth of all types, local service providers can expect to see
greater demands for service. In many cases, lack of resources to meet the
demands will continue to be a problem and offers the following challenge:
A shortage of volunteers to fill out ambulance crews and firefighting teams may
trigger the need for more paid emergency service personnel.
Continued capital improvements planning by the County and other local service
providers will promote cost-effective capital investments. Currently, the County is
investigating the feasibility of establishing a development impact fee program, to
cover the incremental capital costs of new development on specific local services
(e.g., fire protection and law enforcement). A system of development impact fees
could potentially assure that the required infrastructure is in place to support future
growth.
Local municipalities and the Big Sky community are steadily working on upgrading
and/or expanding their sewer and water systems. Their aim is threefold, to: (1)
protect the environment; (2) provide adequate service to current users; and (3) be
prepared to handle future growth within their service areas.
Over the past few years, the Madison County Local Emergency Planning Committee
(LEPC) has served effectively to channel both financial and technical assistance to
local emergency service providers. LEPC efforts in the future will concentrate on
communications, emergency preparedness, and public education and outreach.
Completed plans include Pre-disaster Mitigation (13) and Emergency Operations

Plan (14).

Figure 5-6 - Madison County Per Capita Personal Income

Figure 5-7 - Madison County Employment by Industry

Figure 5-8 - Madison County Employment (1,000’s of Jobs)

Figure 5-9 - Madison County Employment (proportion)

6. Implementation Policies, Regulations and Other Plan Measures
6.1 Plan Implementation – Recommended Actions
Plan implementation is often the weak link in a comprehensive planning effort. It is

admittedly difficult to sustain a public planning process beyond the point of plan
adoption. However, without an active program of plan implementation, the time,
thought, and energy invested by citizens and local officials in preparing (or updating)
the plan document are largely fruitless.
Madison County already uses one important tool of comprehensive plan

implementation, namely, the County subdivision regulations and subdivision review
process. Approvals of subdivisions in Madison County contain a finding, in each
case, that the project is in substantial compliance with the Madison County Growth
Policy. In particular, the Growth Policy Update should serve as a primary guide for
addressing the seven public interest criteria listed in the Montana subdivision and
platting act. The criteria are: effects on (1) agriculture, (2) agricultural water user
facilities, (3) local services, (4) the natural environment, (5) wildlife, (6) wildlife
habitat, and (7) public health and safety. Besides the ongoing review of County
subdivision proposals, this Growth Policy Update outlines an implementation
program of recommended actions. Table 6-1 describes the eighteen actions
involving voluntary initiatives or incentives. The seven actions involving local
regulation are described in Table 6-2. Pertinent Guiding Principles and/or Goals are
identified in each case. A rationale for each recommended action is also given. The
overall program looks to County officials and staff, civic groups, landowner groups,
individual citizens, and cooperating public partners to share the responsibility for
plan implementation.
Table 6-3 is the status of actions taken, started and continuing since the 1999
Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Completed actions are given in Table 6-4.
6.2 Timetable
In some cases, the recommended efforts will be ongoing. For one-time projects, the
estimated timeframe for completion is 5-10 years.
Conditions that will lead to further Policy revision are: (1) passage of time; (2)
changes in state law; (3) significant changes in citizen values, local economy or local
landscape; and/or (4) Planning Board evaluation of Policy implementation measures
and progress, and determination that modifications would enhance the effectiveness
of the Policy and improve the County’s planning program.
The Madison County Planning Board and Planning Office will review the Growth
Policy at least once every five years and revise it as necessary.

Table 6-1 – Recommended Voluntary Actions by Category (from the 1999 Comprehensive Plan)
Action Pertinence to Guiding
Recommended Voluntary Actions by Category
# Principles and/or Goals
Preservation
Work with public and private organizations and landowners to encourage
conservation easements, deed restrictions, land exchanges, and other
Guiding Principles #2, 3.
forms of voluntary land conservation as a means of preserving productive
Land Use, Economy,
agricultural lands, river corridors, and other critical resources.
1. Environment, Recreation,
3C’s Goals.
Rationale: Voluntary tools for land conservation have good potential in Madison
County. Private landowners must have ready access to the information and
organizations that can help them use such tools.
Establish a protocol for conservation easements and development rights.
Incorporate working definitions of productive agricultural lands, important
wildlife habitat, and scenic views and vistas (See Actions #4 and #6 below)
into the program. If feasible, create a local land trust to oversee fundraising
and conservation agreements. Solicit funds from sources such as the Guiding Principles #1, 2, 3.
federal Farmland Protection Program, the State of Montana, private Land Use, Economy,
2. foundations and individuals. Environment, Recreation
Goals.
Rationale: Purchase of conservation easements and development rights puts
money in the pocket of the individual landowner, who in turn supports the land
conservation effort. A local land trust can organize and legitimize a major
fundraising effort and conservation easement/purchase of development rights
program.

Planning & Technical Assistance
Encourage area plans and support landowner-initiated zoning, and provide
information and technical assistance to accomplish both when requested.
The products of such localized planning should be consistent with the
Guiding Principles, goals and objectives, and policies of this Growth
Policy. All Guiding Principles.
3.
All Goals.
Rationale: Madison County includes many different landscapes and
communities. More localized planning enables individual citizens and landowners
to work as neighbors to develop their own plan for the future, and “give it teeth”
through the regulatory tool of zoning.
Work with landowners, local conservation districts, and agency resource
specialists to carry out a land evaluation process which will more clearly
define “productive agricultural lands” and “important wildlife habitat” in
Madison County. Institute a site assessment procedure which will
incorporate these definitions into the review of future land development Guiding Principle #3.
4. and conservation proposals in a fair and consistent manner. Land Use, Economy,
Environment, 3C’s Goals.
Rationale: In Madison County, “productive agricultural lands” and “important
wildlife habitat” mean different things to different people. We need a clearer
understanding of these terms, so we can factor them into our assessments of
land development and conservation proposals.

Work with local conservation districts to conduct watershed assessments
and address issues of water quality and water supply.
Rationale: Clean water -- and enough of it -- are essential to the health of our
economy and environment. We need better information about our surface and Guiding Principle #2. All
5.
groundwater resources, to help safeguard these critical resources in the face of Goals.
continued growth. Conservation district efforts to validate the Montana
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) listing of water quality-impaired
streams should be supported. Water quality and water supply problems should
be addressed in a cooperative fashion.
Carry out a public process of identifying important scenic views and vistas
in the County. Also, update the existing inventory of County cultural and
historic resources. Utilize special local planning area groups as much as
Guiding Principle #2.
possible.
Land Use, Environment,
6.
Recreation, 3C’s Goals
Rationale: If scenic resources are to be factored into the County’s review of
future development proposals, we need to designate those views and vistas
which are important to preserve. Similarly, if we want to protect our cultural and
historic resources, we need to know more about what exists, and where.
Combine land use inventory information with MT Dept. of Revenue property
ownership records to explore possibilities for re-aggregating lots,
subdivision redesign, and agricultural uses of idle lands.
Land Use, Economy,
7.
Environment, Public
Rationale: Opportunities exist for using subdivided but undeveloped lands in
Services Goals.
ways that will better fit County goals and objectives for land use and still serve
private landowner interests.

Prepare and implement a County capital improvements program which will
include priorities for road maintenance, as well as an estimated timeframe,
budget, and potential funding sources for project implementation. Guiding Principle #4.
8. Land Use, Public Services
Rationale: County funds for capital improvements are severely limited. Priorities Goals.
must be set, consistent with County goals and objectives for land use and public
services, so that the most critical needs get addressed first.
Work with emergency service providers and the public to identify those
areas which are “reasonably accessible” to emergency services.
Guiding Principles #1, 4.
9. Rationale: County officials are legally obligated to try to make land use decisions Land Use, Public Services,
which safeguard public health and safety. The identification of areas with 3C’s Goals.
reasonable access to emergency services will provide the public with better
information and County officials with clearer standards for development review.
Make comprehensive planning an ongoing, budgeted program of County
government. As one part of this, continue to build GIS database and keep
mapped information current.
All Guiding Principles.
10.
Rationale: Comprehensive planning does not stop with the adoption of a growth All Goals.
policy. In fact, that’s when the “real work” begins. An ongoing planning program
is needed to coordinate implementation of the County Growth Policy. This
requires updated maps and records.

Information & Communications
Prepare an informational brochure for new and prospective landowners.
Address topics pertinent to buying property, owning land, building a home,
and living in Madison County. Work cooperatively with the Board of
Realtors to assure timely distribution.
Land Use, Economy,
Rationale: It helps everyone if newcomers make informed real estate decisions.
11. Environment, Recreation,
They need to be aware of local laws and customs, and they should know what
Public Services Goals.
kinds of questions to ask (e.g., Where’s the nearest fire station? Are there
noxious weeds on this property? Can I take water from the ditch? Who’s
responsible for maintaining the fence? Who plows the road?) as they explore
their real estate options. Note: This action is already underway, through
citizen initiative. Keep the Code of the New West Updated.
Prepare and distribute a user-friendly guide to the subdivision process.
Rationale: Going through the process of subdivision could be easier on everyone

12. Land Use Goal.
if, at the earliest stage of project development, subdivision applicants are given a
step-by-step account of what will be expected of them and what they can expect
from County officials and staff.
Establish an interagency steering committee to strengthen cooperation and
communications among county, state, and federal officials on land
planning and management-related topics.
13. Rationale: Management of public lands affects local government and private Land Use, 3C’s Goals.
landowners in many ways. Similarly, County actions may affect public lands and
their managing agencies. Regular discussions between the various public entities
can help ensure information-sharing, consultation prior to decisions, and
coordination of land planning and management activities.

Meet annually with officials of incorporated communities to help ensure
coordinated planning between the County and towns. Invite local service
districts to participate in the discussions.
Guiding Principal #1.
14. Land Use, Public Services,
Rationale: Little opportunity exists for County and municipal officials to discuss
3C’s Goals.
planning-related matters unless they create a special opportunity to do so. Since
local service providers often serve both town residents and rural residents of
Madison County, it makes sense to include them in the discussion.
Support State legislation which aids County land use planning, promotes
the retention of agricultural land and the economic viability of family farms
and ranches, and restructures the property tax system to ensure that new
development pays for the public services it requires.
15.
Land Use, Economy Goals.
Rationale: State government has the authority to do things that local
governments cannot do. Legislation which supports County planning efforts, the
agricultural community, and fair and equitable taxation can help Madison County
achieve its comprehensive planning goals.
Economic Development
Coordinate all County economic development-related activities with CEDAT
(Community Economic Development Action Team) in Madison Valley, STAT
(Sheridan/Twin Bridges Action Team) in Ruby Valley, local chambers of
commerce, Montana Chamber of Commerce, Montana Department of
Agriculture, and Headwaters RC&D (Resource Conservation and
16. Economy, 3C’s Goals.
Development District).
Rationale: Madison County should not act alone on matters of local economic
development, when there are several community, regional, and state groups
already in existence.

Conduct a professionally done Countywide economic analysis. Besides an
examination of the different sectors of the local economy, the analysis
should include an assessment of the economic role (benefits and costs) of
public lands. The analysis should also suggest strategies for: (a)
strengthening traditional industries, (b) encouraging newer, expanding
industries, and (c) recruiting new business.
17. Economy, 3C’s Goals.
Rationale: Economic changes in Madison County in recent decades have made it
difficult to understand fully the present and potential future role of various sectors
(e.g., agriculture, outdoor recreation and tourism, retirement-related services).
We need better information about the composition of our local economy in order
to design and carry out effective local economic development strategies that are
consistent with Madison County’s Growth Policy.
Investigate the pros and cons of instituting a property tax incentive
program for new or expanding local industry. If benefits outweigh costs,
design and adopt a tax incentive program. Investigate other incentives to
support agriculture, entrepreneurship, and other sectors of the economy.
18. Economy Goal.
Rationale: Montana State Statutes authorize county governments to give
property tax breaks to new and expanding industries. Such a program may help
Madison County achieve its economy goals and objectives, but a thorough study
of program benefits and costs is in order first. Note: Some legislative changes in
the program may be desirable (e.g., a shorter time period for the incentive).

Table 6-2 - Recommended Regulatory Actions (from the 1999 Comprehensive Plan)
Pertinence to
Action
Recommended Action (Regulatory) Guiding Principles
#
and/or Goals
Revise County subdivision regulations as needed to reflect the policies
contained in this Growth Policy. Incorporate working definitions of “adequate
water supply,” “productive agricultural land,” “important wildlife habitat,” and
All Guiding
areas that are “reasonably accessible” to emergency services into the revised
Principles.
regulations. Do likewise for scenic views and vistas, and historical and cultural
1. Land Use, Economy,
resources, as these resources become more clearly identified.
Environment, Public
Services, 3C’s Goals.
Rationale: Subdivision regulations are a tool for implementing the County Growth
Policy. They should be consistent with the latest plan document, planning information,
and statutes.
Institute an enforcement program to ensure compliance with County
subdivision and/or zoning approvals.
Rationale: County subdivision and zoning decisions are intended to protect the public Land Use,
2. health, safety, and welfare. The County should follow up with periodic field checks to Environment, Public
make sure that subdividers have complied with the conditions under which their Services Goals.
developments received approval. Similarly, once any zoning districts are created and
applied in Madison County, an enforcement effort will be needed to ensure
compliance with these new land use regulations.

Pertinence to
Action
#
and/or Goals
Appoint and provide technical assistance to citizen-based task forces to
develop for river corridor protection proposals (Madison, Ruby, Jefferson, Big
Hole/Beaverhead, South Boulder). Instruct task forces to work closely with
affected landowners. Adopt river corridor protections. First Priorities (assuming
citizen support): Madison River, Ruby River.
Rationale: County subdivision regulations currently include a construction setback

from our rivers. However, this requirement does not apply to dozens of pre-existing
Environment,
3. riverfront lots and parcels. The County floodplain ordinance requires new construction
Recreation, 3C’s
to be elevated above the 100-year floodplain, but it does not prevent buildings from
Goals.
being placed close to the riverbank. County sanitation regulations stipulate
construction setbacks for private water and septic systems, but not buildings.
Consistent policies of river corridor protection can be enforced through zoning. (Since
each river corridor has a distinct character, zoning should reflect such differences.
Since zoning affects what riverfront property owners can and cannot do with their
land, they should be directly involved in the design of any river corridor zoning
proposal.)
Map the 100-year floodplain along Madison, Ruby, Jefferson, Big Hole,
Beaverhead, and South Boulder Rivers. Then, revise floodplain ordinance to
recognize officially designated floodplain. First priorities (assuming citizen
support): Ruby River, Jefferson River. Guiding Principle #2.
Land Use, Economy,
4.
Rationale: Madison County has only a roughly drawn map of “flood-prone areas” to Environment, Public
guide administration of its floodplain ordinance. More accurate information is needed, Services Goals.
in order to protect the floodplain resource, safeguard public health and safety, and
minimize public service costs. Floodplain mapping is a cost-shared service provided
by the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Pertinence to
Action
#
and/or Goals
In cooperation with state and federal public land managers and neighboring
property owners, initiate zoning of public lands. First priority: BLM potential
exchange tracts.
5. Rationale: Transfers of public land to private ownership or recreational lease

All Goals.
agreements have the potential to promote residential development in areas of
traditional agricultural or other resource use. Now and in the future, BLM is willing to
have Madison County zone its potential exchange tracts (25 parcels on nearly 4000
acres, as of 1998) to ensure that its land exchange program does not cause land use
conflicts.
Conduct a cost-of-services study. Based on study findings, institute a payment
program to cover costs of new development.
Rationale: National and neighboring county studies have shown that: (a) residential
development costs county government more in public services than it pays in property
taxes; (b) agriculture pays more in property taxes than it requires in public services;
and (c) commercial and industrial activities pay a lot more in property taxes than they Guiding Principle #4.
6. demand in public services. Different types and locations of residential development Land Use, Public
generate different levels of local tax revenue and service demands. Although services Services, 3C’s Goals.
to the residents of some Madison County subdivisions are likely being subsidized by
other local taxpayers (mainly agricultural households), we have no mechanism in
place for fairly and accurately assessing those new developments for the added
service costs they represent. Until we come up with a method of ensuring that new
development pays its own way, the County’s ability to provide adequate services to all
its citizens will continue to be severely limited.

Pertinence to
Action
#
and/or Goals
7. Adopt a countywide ordinance which provides a more explicit statement of
Right-to-Farm protections.
Rationale: Montana State Statutes confirm that most agricultural activities cannot be Guiding Principle #3.
considered a “nuisance” in legal terms. But as Madison County’s population and Land Use, Economy
landscape continue to change, it is increasingly important that the County issue an Goals.
official statement of Right-to-Farm protections. The statement would clearly
demonstrate Madison County’s support for agriculture and help farmers and ranchers
in situations of potential conflict with neighboring landowners.
Table 6-3 - Status of Work on Implementation Actions Recommended in 2006 Growth Policy / New Actions 2012
Priority Actions
9 = Done Relevant Guiding
What’s Been Accomplished? What Hasn’t?
` = Progress Made Principles, Goals
{ = Not Done
County has supported development of Big Hole Land Use Plan
(15), Sheridan Growth Policy (16), and Twin Bridges Growth
Policy (17). All were adopted and are being implemented.
County has supported citizen processes for North Meadow
Provide Information and
Creek and Bear Creek land use planning and Ruby River and
Technical Assistance to
` Madison River Corridor (& tributaries) setbacks. None have All Guiding Principles.
Support Area Planning
produced a County adopted plan. All Goals.
and/or Landowner-
County assisted in the Madison Growth Solutions planning
initiated Zoning.
process. The Madison Valley Growth Management Action Plan
was adopted in 2007 (2).
County has had initial planning discussions with Jefferson River
Valley, Pony-Harrison-Norris, and Big Sky.

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
The Craighead Institute, The Wildlife Conservation Society and
partnering organizations have conducted wildlife habitat
Conduct Land Evaluation inventories of the Madison Valley (maps included in this Growth
Process, and Institute Policy update). Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks has provided Guiding Principles 2
Site Assessment Process Crucial Areas Planning System (CAPS). Craighead Institute and 3.
`
(emphasis on developed “Wild Planner” software for use by landowners, Land Use, Economy,
“productive” ag lands and developers, agencies, land managers and others interested in Environment and
“important” wildlife evaluating impacts from different scenarios. Consider requiring Recreation Goals.
habitat). use of these tools in the pre-application phase.
County still needs to work on evaluation and assessment for
“productive” agricultural lands.
County supported the Ruby Valley Groundwater Management
Study.
Support Watershed Guiding Principles 1,
The Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology is conducting a
Planning and 2 and 4.
Groundwater Characterization Study for the Madison River.
` Conservation District Land Use, Economy,
County has had initial discussions about a water quality district
Efforts to address Water Environment, and
for Big Sky.
Quality/Water Supply Public Services
Continue to support land use efforts in all of the watersheds,
Issues. Goals.
including the Big Hole, Ruby, Madison, Jefferson, Beaverhead,
and South Boulder.
County prepared and adopted a CIP, which is being
Adopt Capital All Guiding Principles.
9 implemented and periodically updated (18). A full-scale
Improvements Plan. All Goals.
review/update should be done.
Guiding Principles 1
Identify Areas County identified subdivision standards and incorporated these
and 4.
9 “Reasonably Accessible” into its subdivision regulations. Mapping of response times
Land Use and Public
to Emergency Services. included in this update.
Services Goals.

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
Establish Ongoing
9 County Comprehensive County budgets annually, now, for the County Planning Office.
All Goals.
Planning Program.
County has published two editions of this publication (19).
Publish & Distribute Code Distribution is ongoing. Need more effective means for getting All Guiding Principles.
9
of the New West. this into the hands of property owners when it is most useful and All Goals.
effective.
Publish & Distribute
County has published this and distributes it regularly. Materials All Guiding Principles.
9 Subdivision Application
are now posted on the County’s website. All Goals.
Guide.
Establish Interagency All Guiding Principles.
9 County established this committee, which meets quarterly.
Steering Committee. All Goals.
Meet Annually with County has not set up annual meetings.
` All Guiding Principles.
Municipal Officials and Annual meetings with County Planning Boards (and interested
All Goals.
Local Service Providers. town boards) started in 2008.
Support State Legislation
County has monitored these issues at each session of the All Guiding Principles.
9 for Planning &
Montana Legislature, and has provided input. All Goals.
Agriculture.
The Madison County Economic Development Council collects
` Conduct County data. Madison County participates in developing the All Guiding Principles.
Economic Analysis. Community Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) prepared All Goals.
for the region by Headwaters RC&D (11).

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
County revamped its regulations in 2000, based on the 1999
Comprehensive Plan. A major amendment was made in 2006
to conform to the 2006 Madison County Growth Policy (1).
Since then, the County has amended the regulations twice and
passed a resolution allowing limiting the number subdivision
applications accepted. The County needs to update to
` Revise County All Guiding Principles.
incorporate work done on important wildlife habitat (through
Subdivision Regulations. All Goals.
mapping, WildPlanner and CAPS), suggestions from public
(Growth Policy questionnaire), and legislative changes. Work
still needs to be done on productive ag land, adequate water
supply, scenic views, cultural/historical resources, and defining
“close to services”.
Subdivision by rent or lease has developed into an issue.
Institute Enforcement County has set up a subdivision compliance program, but not
Program for Subdivision one for zoning.
All Goals.
and Zoning Compliance. Subdivision by rent or lease has developed into an issue.
County has not zoned any river corridors, though in 2011 the
Planning Board recommended zoning the Madison River and its Guiding Principles 2,
tributaries (20). The County Commissioners decided to seek 5.
voluntary compliance. The County is pursuing a position of Land Use,
{ Zone River Corridors.
educator/collaborator to educate property owners before Environment,
building to address streamside protection, weeds, wildlife Recreation and 3C’s
recommendations and geologic considerations, and distribution Goals.
of Code of the New West.
County “interim” zoned BLM exchange tracts, but this zoning All Guiding Principles.
{ Zone Public Lands.
has expired. County has not zoned any other public lands. All Goals.

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
County has established a practice of negotiating payments as a
part of subdivision review. County has reservations about the
Conduct Cost of Services validity of the cost-of-services study methodology. County
` Study, and Institute waited until State law was changed to expressly allow All Guiding Principles.
Development Payment development impact fees; since then, County continues to All Goals.
Program. explore the possibility of impact fees. Policy related to the
results of the Fiscal Impact Analysis is to be incorporated in the
growth policy and (possibly) subdivision regulations (3).
Guiding Principles 1,
3, 5.
Adopt Right to Farm
9 County adopted a Right to Farm Policy. Land Use, Economy
Ordinance.
and Environment
Goals
County does this regularly. 3, and 5.
Encourage Voluntary
9 Working with Big Hole watershed on potential reimbursement Land Use, Economy,
Land Conservation.
programs for landowners. Environment,
Recreation Goals.
Establish a Program for
{ Purchase of County has made no progress here.
All Goals.
Development Rights.
Inventory Scenic Views Guiding Principle 1.
{ and Cultural/Historic County has made no progress here. Land Use and
Resources. Economy Goals.

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
County has made no progress here. However, the Madison
Explore Possibilities for
Valley Ranchlands Group has made strides in promoting
Re-aggregation of Lots,
agricultural uses of idle lands. The Madison Watershed All Guiding Principles.
{ Subdivision Redesign,
Partnership is continuing dialogue with some land trusts who All Goals.
and Agricultural Uses of
support the idea of finding methods for re-aggregating
Idle Lands.
fragmented subdivided lands for agricultural uses.
Coordinate County County provided start-up technical assistance to the Madison
Economic Development County Economic Development Council. Technical assistance
Activities with Existing is provided as needed.
All Goals.
State & Local ED Participate in the Comprehensive Economic Development
Groups. Strategy (CEDS) developed by Headwaters RC&D (11).
Explore Property Tax and Land Use, Economy,
{ Other Incentives for County has made no progress here. Environment,
Economic Development. Recreation, Public
Services Goals.
County has worked with other counties to accomplish a
Map the 100-year floodplain study of the Big Hole River (21) and channel
` Guiding Principle 1.
Floodplain along Six migration mapping of the Ruby River (22). County is supporting
Rivers. and participating in the Upper Missouri Headwaters Channel
Migration mapping.
Planning continues to work with others investigating ways of
Work collaboratively to Guiding Principles 1,
improving affordable housing conditions throughout the County.
implement the Madison 4, 5.
` A County Housing Board was established but later disbanded as
County Housing Needs Land Use, Economy,
other implementation measures are evaluated.
Assessment and Five- and Public Services
Potential areas for affordable workforce housing were mapped.
Year Plan Goals.
The 2006 study needs to be updated (12).

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
Continue to consider A working group appointed by the Commissioners began Guiding Principle 1, 4,
` development impact fees, looking at impact fees. Road and fire needs were completed 5.
based on feasibility study and mapped before progress stalled. Land Use, Public
recommendations. A Fiscal Impact Analysis was completed in 2010. Services Goals.
Work with Big Sky
landowners to explore
the need for zoning
and/or a development The Planning Board has made a point of meeting in Big Sky at
` permit program. Expand least once a year. Planning is working with the Big Sky Fire
4
County planning services Department, Big Sky Sewer and Water District, and Big Sky
All Goals.
to Big Sky, including Owners Association on a development permit program.
maintaining a more
frequent and regular
presence.
Explore instituting a
development
permit/building inspection
` An initial analysis of building program requirements was All Guiding Principles.
program, whether
prepared. All Goals.
voluntary or mandatory,
in all or parts of the
County.

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
Develop a menu of
potential zoning districts
and development
standards that could be
converted into ordinance
format for application in
different areas of the
County. Topics to
address include:
ridgetop development; All Guiding Principles.
{ No work has been done on this.
dark skies preservation; All Goals.
building setbacks along
streams; urban/wildland
interface; geotechnical
issues; density limitation
and density bonuses;
transfer of development
rights; entryway
corridors; and clustered
development.

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
In cooperation with the
GIS/IT Office, track new
construction (by number
and location) and
Planning works closely with the Sanitarian’s office to identify
purchase visualization
new construction locations, which are then field-verified by the
software (e.g.
GIS/IT office. A system for tracking construction in the Big Sky
CommunityViz) to All Guiding Principles.
` area is needed.
support local area All Goals.
The County’s website is being used more extensively as an
planning processes.
information repository. Electronic survey and commenting
Continue to utilize the
software was used for the growth policy.
County website more
fully, to expand
information and planning
services to the public.
Encourage local
municipalities to adopt Guiding Principle 1, 4.
annexation policies, and Land Use, Economy,
{ coordinate with them on No work has been done. Environment,
the establishment of Recreation, Public
adequate public facilities Services Goals.
ordinances.

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
Support efforts to compile
and analyze groundwater
characterization studies
A study was completed for the Ruby River. The Madison River Guiding Principles 2,
through the County.
study is underway. 3, 4, 5.
Explore the feasibility of
` No progress has been made on water supply standards for new Land Use, Economy,
developing a set of
subdivision. Proposed legislation addressing exempt wells will Environment, Public
science-based local
affect how this proceeds. Services Goals.
standards for water
supply in new
subdivisions.
Work collaboratively with
other counties to achieve
legislative reform that
would tighten up the use
4, 5.
of the family transfer Draft changes to be reviewed during subdivision regulation
` Land Use,
exemption and minimized update.
Environment, Public
the potential for
Services Goals.
landowners to evade the
Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act.
Guiding Principle 5.
Communicate about
Land Use,
{ access to public lands in New suggestion from citizens 2012.
Recreation, 3C’s
Madison County.
Goals

Priority Actions
{ = Not Done
Monitor visitor survey
results from the Institute
Land Use, Economy,
of Tourism & Recreation
{ New suggestion from citizens 2012. Environment,
Research that pertain to
Recreation, Public
views about
Services Goals.
development.
Identify issues/needs of Land Use, Economy,
{ New suggestion from citizens 2012.
our aging population. Recreation, Public
Services Goals.
Improve communication
between Commissioners, All Guiding Principles.
Planning Board and 3C’s Goal.
citizens/communities.
Review implementation
actions bi-annually All Guiding Principles.
(Commissioners/Planning All Goals.
Board).

Table 6-4 - Other Planning Board Accomplishments Since 1999
Relevant Guiding
What Else Did We Do?
Principles, Goals
2001 – covers Silver Star – Cardwell; North
Buildout Study – Portions of County Meadow Creek; Sheridan-Alder; VC Ranches- All Guiding Principles.
(7). Shining Mountains; Big Sky and West Fork- All Goals.
Raynolds Pass.
2003 - adopted
County Strategic Wildland Fire Plan All Guiding Principles.
2012 – under revision (Community Wildfire
(6). All Goals.
Protection Plan)
County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan All Guiding Principles.
2009
(13). All Goals.
2010 – amended procedures
County Rural Addressing System Guiding Principle 5.
Present road naming petitions, provide address
(23) (24). Public Services Goal.
information
Guiding Principles 4, 5.
Tall Structures/Tower Ordinance Land Use, Economy,
2011 - amended
(9). Environment and Public
Services Goals.
Guiding Principles 1, 4 and 5.
Airport Affected Areas. Preliminary draft prepared; need to complete Land Use, Economy, and
Public Services Goals.
Big Hole River Conservation 2004 – Participating with Big Hole Watershed All Guiding Principles.
Development Ordinance (25). Committee in periodic review. All Goals.
Incorporated into the last revision of the Code of All Guiding Principles.
Development Design Guidelines.
the New West (19). All Goals.
2006 (needs to be updated) Guiding Principles 1, 4, 5.
Madison County Housing Needs
Planner is on Trust Montana Board, which is Land Use, Economy, and
Assessment and Five Year Plan
investigating a mechanism for accommodating Public Services Goals.
(12).
housing needs in the long term.

Relevant Guiding
What Else Did We Do?
Principles, Goals
2011 – completed 14 maps and posted on the
website:
Agricultural land; development; big game summer
range; big game winter range; forest species
linkages; species of concern; emergency response All Guiding Principles.
Growth Policy Mapping
– ambulance; emergency response – fire; All Goals.
emergency response law; potential hazards; water
resources; sand and gravel resources; noxious
weeds on public lands; and wildland urban
interface.
Madison Valley Growth All Guiding Principles.
2007
Management Action Plan (2). All Goals.
Guiding Principle 1, 4, 5.
Madison County Fiscal Impact
2010 Land Use, Public Services
Analysis (3).
Goals.
Madison County Community Health
2011 (draft) Public Services Goal.
Needs Assessment (26).
Comprehensive Economic All Guiding Principles.
2007; updating in 2012 (with Headwater RC&D).
Development Strategy (11). All Goals.
(annually) Review applications for PPL and River Guiding Principle 2.
Madison – Missouri River Fund
Fund grant projects. All Goals.

7. Public Infrastructure Strategy
A Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for Madison County was completed in 2001 and
has been updated twice since then (18). The Plan outlines the County’s capital
improvement needs, projects the County’s financial capacity to address these
needs, identifies potential sources of funding, and offers a set of management
policies and financial strategies for meeting the County’s most important needs
using available resources.
An underlying premise of the CIP is that County capital investments should support
the guiding principles, goals and objectives, and development policies of the
Madison County Growth Policy. Accordingly, the CIP has been used extensively to
support an aggressive County bridge repair and replacement program. The CIP has
also served as documentation of the need for courthouse restoration and expansion.
The CIP has helped Madison County officials secure additional funding to meet
pressing capital needs. The CIP is reviewed periodically and, over time, should
become a more direct part of the County’s budget process. The CIP should be
comprehensively reviewed and updated in the near future.
A Fiscal Impact Analysis addressing the County’s ability to pay for future road and
fire improvements was completed in 2010 (3). This analysis illustrates the cost to
the county of locating new development away from existing services and
communities, and how well new development pays its own way.
Impact fees have been under discussion since 2008 as a method of having
development pay its own way.

8. Intergovernmental Coordination
8.1 Special Planning Areas
Madison County encompasses a variety of landscapes and communities. While the

County Growth Policy offers an overall framework for guiding future growth and
change, other more specific plans treat more localized development issues and
opportunities in greater detail. The Growth Policies adopted by the towns of Ennis
(27), Sheridan (16), Twin Bridges (17) and Virginia City (28) are incorporated by
reference. The Community Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) document for
the Headwaters RC&D region (11) is also incorporated by reference, as well as the
more specific area plans, policy plans, and guideline documents that have been
adopted as County Comprehensive Plan Amendments and 2006 Growth Policy
Amendments.
8.2 Coordination with Community Plans
Ennis, Sheridan, Twin Bridges, and Virginia City each have an adopted
comprehensive plan or growth policy. These community plans offer Madison County
additional guidance in making land use and development decisions on lands located
close to established townsites.
The 1995 Virginia City Comprehensive Plan and 1996 Ennis Comprehensive Plan
Update both cover a planning area beyond town limits, as allowed by Montana state
statutes (Virginia City’s plan goes one mile out; Ennis’ plan goes three miles out).
Land development and conservation proposals reviewed by Madison County for the
outlying areas of Ennis or Virginia City should be evaluated against not only this
Growth Policy, but also the town’s plan. These two community plans are hereby
incorporated into the County Policy, in an effort to promote coordinated planning by
Madison County and its municipalities.
Following a recommendation made in the 1999 Comprehensive Plan, the County

Commissioners established the Interagency Coordinating Group, composed of
county officials as well as state and federal land managers. The Group meets
quarterly and exchanges information about current and upcoming projects of mutual
interest.
Another recommendation contained in the Plan, not yet fully implemented, is to have
an annual meeting with municipal officials and local service district representatives in
Madison County. This Growth Policy Update reaffirms the value of this
recommended action.
Master plans and/or overall development plans have been approved for the resort
developments in Big Sky, Yellowstone Club and Moonlight Basin. As the projects are
built out, they should be replaced with community based plans.

8.3 Incorporation of Other County Plans
Area, facility, or program-specific plans adopted by Madison County officials should

be prepared and carried out in a manner consistent with the Growth Policy. The
following plans, and their amendments and revisions, are incorporated in this Growth
Policy:
• Madison Valley Growth Management Action Plan, 2007 (2).

• Madison County Strategic Wildland Fire Plan, 2003 (6).
• Madison County airport master plans (8).
• Madison County Integrated Weed Management Plan, 2012 (10).
• Madison County Housing Needs Assessment and Five-Year Plan, 2006 (12).
• Madison County Emergency Operations Plan, 2011 (14).
• Madison County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan, 2003 (13).
• Big Hole Watershed Land Use Plan, 2003 (15).
• Madison County Capital Improvements Plan (plus amendments), 2001 (18).
• Madison County Community Health Needs Assessment, 2011 (26).
• Madison County Resource Planning Guidance, 2004 (29).
• Madison County Development Design Guidelines, 2005 (30).
Wherever possible in keeping with state law, implementation and any future revision
of these specific plans should adhere to the Guiding Principles, goals and objectives,
and policies of the Madison County Growth Policy.
8.4 State and Federal Agency Plans
A significant portion of property within Madison County is owned and managed by

federal and state agencies. The agencies are consulted during the subdivision
process. The Interagency Coordinating Group facilitates discussions among the
agencies and the county to minimize conflicts and encourage cooperation.
Resource Planning Guidance (29), adopted in 2004, describes how Madison County
will participate in plans prepared by federal agencies.

9. Growth Policy and Subdivision Review
9.1 Review Criteria
In 2009, the Montana legislature modified 76-3-608(3)(1), MCA, by splitting the

review criterion “effect on wildlife and wildlife habitat” into 2 separate criteria. This
increases the subdivision review criteria from six to seven: (1) effect on agriculture;
(2) effect on agricultural water user facilities; (3) effect on the natural environment;
(4) effect on wildlife; (5) effect on wildlife habitat; (6) effect on local services; and (7)
effect on public health and safety. Three criteria of local importance were added to
the statutory requirements: effect of proposed subdivision on County resources;
effect of proposed subdivision on the County’s economy; and effect of proposed
subdivision on public services provided by other entities in the County. The
September 2006 Madison County Subdivision Regulations contain a discussion of
the original six criteria, with wildlife and wildlife habitat combined into one review
criteria, and the three local criteria. The modified discussion, which will need to be
incorporated in the subdivision regulations, is given in APPENDIX B. Basic terms
are defined in APPENDIX A.
The discussion questions associated with each of the subdivision review criteria are
designed to identify whether or not a proposed subdivision is likely to trigger
significant changes, whether or not these changes are positive or negative or
neutral, and whether or not any negative impacts can be mitigated. These
questions, in combination with definitions provided in Appendix A of the Subdivision
Regulations, serve to define the criteria. As funds become available and
opportunities arise, it would be helpful to expand upon these definitions in two ways:
(1) compile baseline data pertinent to each review criterion; and (2), through a public
planning process, establish acceptable thresholds of change in each case.
9.2 Subdivision evaluation process with respect to criteria
At the time of pre-application, subdivision applicants are informed that their projects
will be evaluated against the ten review criteria. All subdivision applications must
address these criteria to some degree; those that include an environmental
assessment must consider them in more detail.
As a part of their evaluation of each proposed subdivision, the Madison County

Commissioners, Planning Board, and Planning staff considers these review criteria.
The Planning staff’s written report on each proposed subdivision includes a
discussion of each review criterion, followed by a set of recommended Findings of
Fact which provide a conclusive statement about each criterion. The Planning
Board’s written recommendations to the County Commissioners do likewise. The
County Commissioners’ written decision on each plat outlines, criterion by criterion,
both a discussion and a concluding Finding of Fact. In addition, the County
Commissioners provide the subdivider with a written statutory and regulatory
justification for their subdivision decision.

In cases where a proposed subdivision is deemed likely to generate negative
effects, the County Commissioners’ written decision on the project reflects whether
or not the impacts can be mitigated and, if so, how. Methods of mitigation are
expressed as preliminary plat approval conditions which must be met before final
plat approval can be granted.
A subdivision application may be exempted from being evaluated against the review
criteria, as outlined in state law (MCA 76-3-201 et seq.).
9.3 Public Hearing Process
Public hearings on proposed subdivisions are conducted according to the following

procedures:
• Planning Board President opens the public hearing.
• Planner provides a summary of the subdivision application and staff report.
• Subdivision applicant is given an opportunity to make comments.
• Planning Board members are given an opportunity to ask clarifying questions
of the subdivision applicant and Planning staff.
• Members of the public have an opportunity to make comments. 23
• Public comment is closed and Planning Board discussion takes place.
• If Planning Board members feel prepared to make a decision on the project,
they vote to recommend project approval, conditional approval, or denial.
• If Planning Board members feel they need more information or time to
consider the project before voting, or if the subdivision applicant wishes to
modify the project and bring a revised proposal back to the Planning Board,
or if the public hearing has gone on more than two hours and there are still
citizens who haven’t had a chance to testify, the Planning Board may opt to
extend the public hearing in accordance with the review time requirements
outlined in state law.
• Once all public comments have been received within the allowable timeframe,
and once the Planning Board has taken its vote, the Planning Board
President closes the public hearing.
9.4 Purpose/Role of Overall Development Plan
The overall development plan shows the future development potential of areas
which are contained within a single tract or ownership but not included in a
subdivision proposal. Overall development plans are evaluated and reviewed
following the same process used for subdivisions. An overall development is useful
for both the public sector and the private sector in making investment decisions.
23
Public comments may be made either verbally or in writing. Written comments
must be submitted to the Planning Board by the close of the public hearing.
9.5 Exemptions
Certain subdivisions are exempt from review under the seven review criteria and/or
surveying requirements. The County defines how the exemptions are reviewed to
determine whether they are eligible for the proposed exemption.

10. Other Elements
10.1 Madison Valley Plan
The 1988 County Comprehensive Plan Update contained an area-specific plan for
the Madison Valley (31). Since preparation of the 1988 Update, residential and
recreational development has continued in many parts of the valley. During that
time, the Madison County Planning Board found the Madison Valley Plan to be
useful in some respects and problematic in others.
Several of the Madison Valley Plan’s area-specific policies for future land
development and conservation remain relevant and are hereby reaffirmed. A few
were slightly modified in 1999, and are hereby reaffirmed. The updated policies are
outlined below:
• Madison River Corridor. Preserve and protect the entire corridor, from Quake
Lake north to the County line, from encroachment by development.
Specifically, the following values should be protected: scenic, fish and wildlife,
recreation, agricultural, historic and archaeologic, and floodplain sites.
• County Road System. Locate new subdivisions in areas where they can be
served by existing roads, and where these roads are capable of providing an
adequate level of services without increasing the cost of services.
• Recreational Amenities. Locate new subdivisions in areas which will not
adversely impact present or future recreational amenities, including the
Madison River Corridor, Ennis Lake, national forest lands, and other public
lands. Big game winter ranges, public access routes to public lands, fishing
access sites, and campgrounds should be protected from improper or
incompatible development in order to preserve and protect wildlife resources
and promote recreation and tourism elements of the economy.
• Agriculture. Subdivisions locating adjacent to agricultural lands must fully
consider the impacts of development on the agricultural operations. In
addition, key agricultural lands should be protected from development or
other uses which would forever remove them from agricultural production.
Encourage clustered development. Incentives should be developed to
implement this policy, and private property rights should be respected.
• Mining. Limit or prohibit residential development close to operating mines or
important mineral deposits where surface and mineral estates are separately
owned.
• Highway corridors. Development adjacent to the highways leading in and out
of Madison Valley’s communities should be aesthetically pleasing, in keeping
with the scenic beauty of the valley.
The land use recommendations and map contained in the 1988 Madison Valley Plan
had grown outdated and were dropped in 1999:

The Madison Valley Plan’s density recommendations for residential land use
promote an unfortunate “bull’s eye” pattern of scattered rural residential
development. Lots of one acre are encouraged in the suburban area
immediately surrounding the Town of Ennis; lots up to 2.5 acres in size are
recommended between the suburban area and a ten-mile radius from Ennis;
and lots of 5-20 acres are encouraged in more remote locations. This
recommended land use pattern invites conversion of agricultural land and other
open space to a landscape of “ranchettes”. It offers no strategy for preserving
open space while accommodating new development on a limited scale or
through clustering.
10.2 1983 Madison River Corridor Study
Action plan recommendations of the 1983 Madison River Corridor Study (32) were
incorporated into the 1988 Madison Valley Plan. These recommendations urged an
aggressive but totally voluntary approach to river corridor preservation and
protection, through the tools of conservation easements, land trades, cooperative
management, and sensitive subdivision design. In 1993, the Madison County
Planning Board and County Commissioners amended County subdivision
regulations to include a required 500' building setback from the Madison River.
Construction close to the riverbank has continued to occur on pre-existing
subdivision lots and certificate of survey parcels.
The totally voluntary approach recommended by the 1983 Madison River Corridor
Study can no longer be endorsed. In addition to subdivision regulations governing
new construction along the river on newly created lots, Madison County landowners
and elected officials should consider zoning as an additional regulatory tool. A
recommended approach for using this tool is discussed under Plan Implementation.
At the request of the Commissioners and after extensive public review and
comment, the Planning Board proposed a resolution to address pre-existing parcels
in 2010 (20). The Commissioners declined further action on the resolution, and
directed the Planning Board to consider means of implementing the
recommendations contained within the resolution as guidelines for development
throughout the County.
10.3 Madison Valley
Over time, a revised set of land use recommendations should be prepared by

Madison Valley landowners themselves. They should also revisit, expand, and clarify
the above-listed policies for guiding future growth and development in the Madison
Valley.
Members of the Madison Valley Ranchlands Group worked on a land use plan and
possible zoning district for several North Meadow Creek properties. Their
“neighborhood” plan, in combination with landowner-led planning efforts in other
parts of the Madison Valley, provided the basis for the Madison Valley Growth

Management Plan (2). Such area-specific plans will be incorporated into the County
Growth Policy.
Other Madison Valley landowners are strongly encouraged to begin working on land
use plans for their respective neighborhoods (See Plan Implementation). All such
efforts should be consistent with the above-listed Madison Valley land use policies
and the Guiding Principles, goals and objectives, and policies expressed in the
Madison Valley Growth Management Action Plan and this Growth Policy.
10.4 Ruby Valley, Jefferson Valley, Beaverhead Valley
Land use plans for these other areas of Madison County do not exist. The
landowner-led, neighborhood planning approach outlined above for the Madison
Valley is encouraged here as well (See Plan Implementation). Channel migration
mapping done on the Lower Ruby River (22) is a useful tool for estimating river
movement.
10.5 Virginia City/Nevada City Area
Despite an ongoing and aggressive preservation effort, the historic resources and
character of Virginia City and Nevada City remain threatened by the potential for
inappropriate development on lands adjacent to the historic towns. Of particular
concern is the use of the family transfer exemption to create lots. One parcel just
outside of Virginia City was split into 13 lots through a series of family exemptions.
These lots were created without consideration of any of the subdivision review
criteria, especially public safety. A land use plan and land use regulations are
needed to guide future growth and development in the area surrounding the
incorporated limits of Virginia City (See Plan Implementation).
Such planning should consider the historic preservation, entryway corridor,

watershed protection, and viewshed protection goals and objectives contained in the
Virginia City Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the Guiding Principles, goals and
objectives, and policies of this Growth Policy should be upheld. An effective planning
process will require involvement by not only town and county officials, but also
affected landowners (including the State of Montana) and other local citizens. Any
joint city-county-landowner planning effort should respect private property rights as
set out in law, and the jurisdictional authority of each governing body.
10.6 Big Hole Watershed
A landowner-led effort to address development on the Big Hole River resulted in the
adoption of the Big Hole Conservation Standards (25) by the four counties that share
the river. The local land-use committee continues to address development issues,
with proposals addressing floodplain development and payments for good
environmental stewardship. Channel migration mapping on the Big Hole River (21)
is being supplemented to produce usable floodplain maps for the Big Hole.

11. List of Appendices and Reference Documents
11.1 Appendices
APPENDIX A. Glossary of Terms
APPENDIX B. Discussion of Subdivision Review Criteria
11.2 Reference Documents

1. Madison County Growth Policy (adopted September 2006) and Madison County
Comprehensive Plan Update (adopted 1999). 2006.
2. Madison Valley Growth Management Action Plan. 2007.
3. Fiscal Impact Analysis for Madison County. 2010.
4. Summary of Growth Policy Questionnaire (Fall 2011) and Public Meetings (Spring
2012). 2011-2012.
5. Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation: Guidelines for
Development within the Wildland-Urban Interface, September 24, 2009. 2009.
6. Madison County Strategic Wildland Fire Plan. 2003.
7. Madison County Build-Out Study. 2001.
8. Airport Plans – Twin Bridges, Ennis Big Sky. Various Years.
9. Ordinances 1-2003 and 1-2011, Tall Structures/Towers . 2003, 2011.
10. Madison County Integrated Weed Management Plan. 2012.
11. Headwaters Resource Conservation and Development District: Comprehensive
Economic Development Strategy. Various Years.
12. Madison County Housing Needs Assessment and Five-Year Plan. 2006.
13. Madison County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan. 2003.
14. Madison County Emergency Operations Plan. 2011.
15. Big Hole Watershed Land Use Plan. 2003.
16. Sheridan Growth Policy Update. 2010.
17. Twin Bridges Growth Policy.
18. Madison County Capital Improvement Plan. 2001 (plus amendments).
19. Madison County Code of the New West. 2006.
20. Proposed Resolution: Streamside Protection Standards and Permitting Process
for Madison County Waterways Within the Madison River Watershed . 2010.
21. Big Hole River Channel Migration mapping (and revisions).
22. Lower Ruby River Channel Migration Mapping.
23. Ordinance No. 3-2000, An Ordinance Establishing and Orderly System for
Naming Roads, Addressing Property, Placing Road Intersection Signs, and Insuring
Continuity for Future Growth in Madison County. 2000.
24. Resolutions 34-2004, 15-2010 – Establishing Policy for Naming and Renaming
Roads in Madison County. 2004, 2010.
25. Ordinance 1-2004 Big Hole River Conservation Standards and Development.
2004.
26. Madison County Community Health Needs Assessment. 2011.
27. Ennis Comprehensive Plan.
28. Virginia City Comprehensive Plan.
29. Madison County Resource Planning Guidance. 2004.
30. Madison County Development Design Guidelines. 2005.

31. Madison Valley Plan. 1988.
32. Madison River Corridor Study. 1983.

APPENDIX A - Glossary of terms
Agricultural water user facility: Any part of an irrigation system used to
produce an agricultural product on property used for agricultural purposes.
Agriculture: The practice of cultivating the ground, raising crops, and/or rearing
animals.
Big game summer range: Habitat which supports the larger hunted animals
(e.g., deer, elk, and moose) during the summer months.
Big game winter range: Habitat which supports the larger hunted animals (e.g.,
deer, elk, and moose) during the winter months.
Capital investment: Money spent to build, expand, or otherwise improve major

public facilities (see definition of capital improvements program)
Capital improvements program (CIP): A program outlining where, when, and

how much a community or county plans to invest in major public facilities over
the next 5-10 years. A CIP may address items such as roads and bridges,
emergency service facilities and equipment, school and library buildings, sewer
and water systems, solid waste disposal sites.
Certificate of survey (COS): A drawing of a field survey prepared by a

registered land surveyor for the purpose of disclosing parcel features and
boundary locations. COSs are often filed as a legal document to describe land
divisions which are exempt from the subdivision review process.
Clustered development, or clustering: Grouping houses on part of a property

while maintaining a large amount of open space on the remaining land.
Comprehensive plan (or master plan, as described in Chapter 76 of

Montana State Statutes): A publicly prepared plan which describes current and
future conditions of a community or county, outlines goals and objectives for land
use and other features of community life, and recommends implementation
measures designed to help achieve the goals.
Conservation easement: A voluntary restriction of land use, particularly with

respect to residential development. A landowner may sell or donate a
conservation easement to a public or private land trust.
Constitutional Amendment No. 75 (CI-75): A successful 1998 Montana ballot

measure requiring an election and voter approval of any new or increased tax
imposed by state or local governments, school districts, and other taxing districts.
Growth Policy 2012 – Page A-1

Cost-of-services study: Research conducted to estimate the cost of local
services required by different kinds of development or land use, relative to the
property taxes paid.
Deed restriction: A voluntary land use restriction placed by a landowner on his

or her property.
Density: The number of buildings or housing units on particular area of land.
Emergency services: Community services such as fire protection, law

enforcement, ambulance service, quick response, search and rescue, flood and
disaster relief. Emergency services are generally provided by local governments
or private, nonprofit organizations.
Entryway corridor: The roadway corridor leading into and out of a community.
Often, the corridor is an area of transitioning land uses, with more intense and
urban activities located closest to the community center.
Floodplain: Generally the channel of a river or stream and the area adjoining a
river or stream, which would be covered by floodwater of a base flood except for
designated shallow flooding areas that receive less than one foot of water per
occurrence. The floodplain consists of a floodway and a floodway fringe.
Geographic information system (GIS): A method of computer mapping that

enables layers of land-related information (e.g., soils, roads, waterways,
buildings) to be illustrated and analyzed in various combinations. GIS maps and
databases may be used to predict future conditions under different hypothetical
scenarios.
Infrastructure: Public facilities such as sewer and water systems, roads and
bridges, and buildings.
Initiative 105 (I-105): A property tax freeze approved by Montana voters in 1986.
I-105 capped at 1986 levels the number of mills Madison County officials can
levy (see mill levy definition).
Intermontane: A term used to describe the drainage basins which lie between
mountain ranges.
Intermountain Seismic Belt: An earthquake-active area of the Rocky Mountain

West.
Land exchange: Typically, the process by which a public land management

agency trades or sells a parcel of public land in exchange for the acquisition of
land which is deemed to hold higher resource values for public purposes.

Land trust: A nonprofit organization that receives property, conservation
easements, and development rights as a way of promoting goals such as open
space preservation and farmland protection. A land trust may accept donations
and/or make purchases.
Local services: Any and all services or facilities that local government entities
are authorized to provide.
Mill levy: The level of property tax set by a local government. One mill equals
one one-thousandth of the total taxable value of the particular jurisdiction.
Montana Code Annotated (MCA): Montana statutes.
Municipality: An incorporated city or town.
Natural environment: The physical conditions which exist within a given area,
including land, air, water, mineral, flora, fauna, noise, and objects of historic or
aesthetic considerations.
Open space: Defined by Montana state statutes, as “...any land which is

provided or preserved for: (a) park or recreational purposes; (b) conservation of
land or other natural resources; (c) historic or scenic purposes; or (d) assisting in
the shaping of the character, direction, and timing of community development.”
Payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILT): Annual payment made by the federal

government to each county government where federally managed public lands
are located. The payment is intended to compensate county governments, in
part, for the fact that public lands are exempt from local taxation.
Prime farmland: As defined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service,

those lands which are best suited to producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and
oilseed crops. In Madison County, prime farmland has an adequate and
dependable supply of irrigation water, favorable temperature and growing
season, and acceptable acidity and alkalinity.
Prime forestland: As defined by the U.S. Forest Service, those timberlands

which have soil capable of growing wood at the rate of 85 cubic feet or more per
acre per year in natural stands and are not in urban or built-up land uses or
water.
Public health and safety: A condition of optimal well-being, free from danger,
risk, or injury for a community at large, or for all people, not merely for the welfare
of a specific individual or a small class of persons.
Public services: Services and facilities provided to the general community by

government or quasi-public entities. Examples include: roads and bridges,

emergency services, schools and libraries, sewer and water systems, and solid
waste disposal.
Ranchette: A term used to describe small acreages of rural residential

development, where landowners generally have a homesite, a few horses or
livestock, and a fenced perimeter.
Re-aggregating lots: Voluntary action by a landowner or group of landowners to

reassemble lots previously created by land division, in order to create one or
more larger parcels.
Right-to-Farm law: A Montana state law which excludes standard agricultural

practices from being considered “nuisances.” 24
Riparian area: Defined by the University of Montana’s Riparian and Wetland

Research Program, as the “green zone” which lies between channels of flowing
water and uplands and which serves several functions, including: water storage
and aquifer recharge, filtering of chemical and organic wastes, sediment
trapping, bank building and maintenance, flow energy dissipation, and primary
biotic production.
Species of special concern: Types of wildlife and vegetation which are

considered by the Montana Natural History Program and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service to be threatened, endangered, or otherwise vulnerable to decline.
Subdivision: The division of a parcel of land into lots for future sale and/or
development. In Montana, proposed land divisions that create one or more
parcels containing less than 160 acres are generally called subdivisions, and
they must be reviewed and approved by the local governing body.
Subdivision moratorium: Action by a local government to stop, for a specified

period of time, the subdivision review and approval process. This action is
usually undertaken in order to allow time for the adoption or revision of a
comprehensive plan or subdivision regulations.
Viewshed: The landscape visible from a particular viewing point.
Watershed: All of the land from which water flows into a particular water body.
Wildlife: Living things which are neither human nor domesticated nor plant.
Wildlife habitat: Place or type of site where wildlife naturally lives and grows.
24
The statutory provision is found in section 27-30-101 MCA

Zoning: A regulatory tool available to local governments to designate the
location and character of various land uses. 25
25
Refer to Chapter 76 of the Montana State Statutes for a more detailed description of the
comprehensive plan, subdivision review process, and zoning.

APPENDIX B. Discussion of Public Interest Criteria
Note: The following questions are intended to be used as a guide for addressing the
public interest criteria. The subdivider must demonstrate, through the environmental
assessment, that the proposed subdivision has been designed with consideration of
these criteria.
#1. Effect of proposed subdivision on agriculture
Has the land historically been used for agriculture? How is the land currently
used, and what are the proposed uses? If the land is not currently used for
agriculture, does it have potential as highly productive agricultural ground?
What percentage of this land is considered “prime or unique farmland”

(according to Natural Resource Conservation Service definition), or “prime
forestland” (according to U.S. Forest Service definition)?
What percentage of this land can be described as “productive” agricultural

land, taking into consideration factors such as: soil quality, topography,
climate, vegetation, availability of water, existing land use patterns,
technological and energy inputs required, suitability for crop-raising/livestock
grazing/timber growth, and accepted agricultural practices?
Is the proposed subdivision designed to keep a portion of the land in

agricultural use? Is the proposed subdivision designed to avoid development
of the most productive acreage? Is the proposed subdivision designed to
avoid development of acreage that plays a vital role in an existing agricultural
operation (e.g., spring pasture)?
If the subdivision is approved, how much land will be taken out of agriculture?
Is this proposed subdivision intended to provide an agricultural producer with

funds that will help maintain or expand an existing agricultural operation in
Madison County?
Will irrigation water rights be conveyed with the proposed lots? If so, is there
a plan for the distribution of water to the lots?
Are upslope or downslope properties currently irrigated? If so, how will the
proposed subdivision affect them? How will they affect the proposed
subdivision?
What are the adjacent land uses? Is the majority of adjacent land in
agricultural use? Is the majority of adjacent land subdivided into lots less
than 160 acres in size?
Growth Policy 2012 – Page B-1

What measures will be taken to ensure that the proposed subdivision will not
conflict with nearby agricultural operations (e.g., perimeter fencing, strategies
to control wildlife populations and prevent wildlife displacement or attraction,
restrictive covenants pertaining to domestic pets, etc.)?
#2. Effect of proposed subdivision on agricultural water user facilities
Are there irrigation ditches, canal, and other water user facilities (and
associated easements) on this land? If so, have affected water users been
notified of the proposed subdivision, and have they expressed any concern
about its effect on their facilities? Are the easements adequate to protect
water user facilities and allow for routine maintenance?
Will water rights stay with the land proposed for subdivision? If so, how will
distribution of the subdivision water be managed?
#3. Effect of proposed subdivision on the natural environment
Surface water quality. Does the proposed subdivision contain or lie adjacent
to a water body? If so, is it designed to prevent erosion or other potential
surface water quality problems?
Groundwater quality. Do soil characteristics indicate the land may be

vulnerable to groundwater pollution from development? If so, how is the
proposed subdivision designed to minimize the potential for groundwater
pollution?
Soil erosion potential. Are soils on the land considered erodable, according
to the Madison County Soil Survey and on-site inspection? Is the proposed
subdivision designed to avoid or minimize construction on the more erodable
soils? If not, what measures are proposed to prevent erosion?
Surface water run-off. Is the proposed subdivision designed to avoid or

minimize drainage problems? Has a grading and drainage plan been
prepared to prevent potential drainage problems?
Vegetative health. Is the land located in an area where threatened and/or

endangered plant species are known to exist? If so, what mitigation measures are
proposed to protect the species? Is the proposed subdivision designed to protect
natural vegetation and limit road length, so as to prevent the spread of noxious
weeds? What is the noxious weed condition of the land? Has the subdivider begun
the process of preparing a weed management plan for review and approval by the
Madison County Weed Board?

Air quality. Does this proposed subdivision have the potential to degrade
neighborhood air quality? If so, what mitigation measures are proposed to protect
air quality?
Riparian areas, wetlands, flood-prone areas. Do soils, vegetation, and Madison

County flood-prone area maps indicate that the land includes any of these types of
areas? If so, is the proposed subdivision designed to avoid construction (buildings
and/or roads) in these areas? If not, have the necessary permits been applied for?
Natural topography. Does the contour map identify areas of steep slope (25% or
greater)? If so, is the proposed subdivision designed to avoid these steep slopes?
Will construction of the subdivision reasonably maintain the natural topographic
features of the land?
Open landscape, scenic beauty. Is the proposed subdivision designed to conserve

land by clustering homesites and maintaining significant open space? Is it designed
to avoid ridgetops and visual encroachment into river corridors? Is it designed to
conserve any views and vistas which are identified in an adopted land use plan?
#4. Effect of proposed subdivision on wildlife and

#5. Effect of proposed subdivision on wildlife habitat
What types of wildlife are found (or likely to be found) in the habitat where this
proposed subdivision is located? Consider both game species and non-game
species of animals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. Consider both permanent
and seasonal wildlife populations.
Is the proposed subdivision located in big game winter range, an area of elk calving,
and/or a wildlife migration corridor?
Is the proposed subdivision located in a wildlife breeding area?
Is the proposed subdivision located in habitat which supports threatened and/or

endangered species?
Is the proposed subdivision located in or adjacent to an area considered by wildlife

specialists to be rich in wildlife resources?
If the proposed subdivision is located in an area considered rich in wildlife

resources, is the subdivision designed to minimize negative impacts on the wildlife?
---- Development design measures could include clustering, reduced number of lots,
buffer zones, access or use limitations, conservation easements, restrictive
covenants, wildlife habitat enhancement projects, and wildlife habitat replacement
areas.
---- Negative impacts could include wildlife harassment, displacement,

endangerment, and either population loss or uncontrolled population increase.

If the proposed subdivision is located adjacent to an area rich in wildlife resources,
what measures are proposed to protect the adjacent habitat and wildlife population
from being negatively impacted by the development?
Is the proposed subdivision likely to put the immediate area close to, at, or over the
limits of being able to sustain existing wildlife populations?
Is the proposed subdivision likely to displace wildlife in a way that will create
problems for adjacent landowners?
#6. Effect of proposed subdivision on local services
Will the proposed subdivision connect to existing community water and sewer
systems? If so, can these existing systems handle the additional demand?
How much additional traffic will the proposed subdivision generate? Can local
roads/bridges handle the additional load on a year-round basis? If not, what capital
improvements will be necessary?
Is the proposed subdivision likely to put local services close to, at, or over their
limits of service capability?
At full build-out, what will the proposed subdivision require of local law enforcement,
fire district, quick response unit, ambulance service, and school district (Estimate in
terms of annual cost, increased demand, or other measure)? How does this
compare with the local services demanded of the current land uses?
At full build-out, what will the proposed subdivision generate in annual property tax
revenues (using current dollars)? How does this compare with the property tax
revenues being paid currently?
If the proposed subdivision appears likely to generate insufficient property taxes to

cover the local services it will require, has the applicant agreed to make any
payment towards bridging the gap?
Will this proposed subdivision add to the County’s affordable housing stock
(“affordable”, as defined by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development)?
Will this proposed subdivision have adequate utility service (power, telephone, solid
waste disposal)?
#7. Effect of proposed subdivision on public health and safety
Do well logs from nearby wells demonstrate a clean and adequate water supply in
the area (Well logs should pertain to nearby lands which are comparable in
elevation, soil type, and topography to the land proposed for subdivision)? If there
are no nearby well logs available, what information has been provided to indicate

adequacy of the water supply? Have any test wells been drilled on-site and been
found to produce water in accordance with state standards?
Is the proposed subdivision located in an area of natural hazard (e.g., flooding,

earthquake zone, steep slopes/unstable soils/slides, high water table, high fire
hazard or designated wildland/urban interface area, habitat for potentially
dangerous wildlife such as bears and mountain lions)? If so, is the subdivision
designed to eliminate or overcome the hazard?
Is the proposed subdivision located in an area of manmade hazard (e.g., high

voltage line, high pressure gas line, shooting range or public hunting grounds,
airport, heavy industrial activity, heavy traffic volume, unmaintained/seasonal public
road, polluted air or water supply)? Will the proposed subdivision attract potentially
dangerous wildlife such as bears and mountain lions? If so, is the subdivision
designed to mitigate any such hazards?
What is the proposed subdivision’s fire risk rating? What is the fire district’s
Insurance Service Office rating? What fire protection measures will be taken as a
part of the subdivision proposal, to maintain a low risk?
What is the estimated response time (under good weather conditions) of various
emergency services (fire protection, law enforcement, ambulance service, quick
response unit) to the site? In the view of the emergency service providers, are
these response times adequate to provide reasonable public health and safety
protection?
Does the proposed subdivision itself include any activity or facility which could
potentially endanger the public (e.g., commercial fuel storage tank, airport activity,
irrigation canal, ponds)? If so, what measures will be taken to reduce, eliminate, or
overcome the hazard?
#8. Effect of proposed subdivision on other resources in the County [”Resources”

are those County land and water-based assets which support a significant portion of the
local economy]. Note: Effect on agricultural resources, including timber, is covered under Public Interest
Criterion #1.
Will the proposed subdivision impact the utilization of the County’s mineral
resources? Does the subdivider propose mitigating measures to reduce any
potential negative impacts?
Will the proposed subdivision impact the outdoor recreation, tourism, scenic,
cultural and historic resources of the County? Does the subdivider propose
mitigating measures to reduce any potential negative impacts?
Is the proposed subdivision located on land that was previously publicly owned and
then purchased or traded from a public land management agency?

Overall, how is the proposed subdivision likely to affect the County’s resource
base? Is it likely to cause conflicts between resource users? What are its long-run
implications, in terms of cumulative impacts?
#9. Effect of proposed subdivision on the County’s economy.
Will the proposed subdivision help to strengthen the major sectors of our local
economy (e.g., agriculture, forestry, mining, recreation and tourism, retirement-
related services, entrepreneurial enterprises, and construction activity)?
Will the proposed subdivision help to diversify the economic base?
Will the proposed subdivision utilize and protect the resources which support the
major economic sectors? Note: This question is closely tied to Public Interest Criterion #7.
Will the proposed subdivision support the economic viability of family farms and
ranches? Note: This question is closely tied to Public Interest Criterion #1.
Will the proposed subdivision promote new business and industry which are
compatible with the major economic sectors and do not put a financial strain on
public services?
Will the proposed subdivision help to expand the opportunities for year-round
employment?
How will the proposed subdivision affect the land’s contribution to the local
economy? Note: Answers to this question will be used to develop a database of countywide
changes in the utilization and economic productivity of land in Madison County.
Overall, what economic impact is the proposed subdivision likely to have in the
short-term? The long-term?
#10. Effect of proposed subdivision on public services provided by other entities

in the County.
Will the proposed subdivision raise the cost of services being provided by other
entities (e.g., property owners association, road maintenance district)?
Will the proposed subdivision have other impacts on the services being provided by
other entities?

PUBLIC INTEREST CRITERIA -- SUMMARY EVALUATION
Note: A proposed subdivision may have both positive and negative effects on any one of these
criteria.
Potential Effects of
Positive Neutral Negative Comments
Proposed Subdivision
Public Interest Criteria
#1. Effect on agriculture.
#2. Effect on agricultural

water user facilities.
#3. Effect on natural

environment.
#4. Effect on wildlife.
#5. Effect on wildlife

habitat.
#6. Effect on local services
#7. Effect on public health

and safety.
#8. Effect on other

resources in the county.
#9. Effect on local

economy.
#10. Effect on public

services provided by other
entities in the county.

Madison County Growth Policy - 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Madison County Growth Policy - 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Madison County Growth Policy - 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MADISON COUNTY

Web Based Version

Adopted March 2013, Resolution 11-2013

Lane Adamson Dave Maddison

Revised and Adopted by the

James P. Hart, Chairman

For more information, contact the

Growth Policy 2012 - Page i

Growth Policy 2012 - Page ii

Growth Policy 2012 - Page iii

Table 3-1 - New Development Policies ................................................................... 3-5

Growth Policy 2012 - Page iv

Growth Policy 2012 - Page v

The primary changes in the 2012 Growth Policy are:

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 1-1

1.3 Guiding Principles

• Guiding Principle #1. Locate new development close to existing

• Guiding Principle #2. Protect our river corridors

• Guiding Principle #3. Preserve our most productive agricultural lands

• Guiding Principle #5. Respect private property rights

1.4 Goals and Objectives

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 1-2

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 1-3

Goal 4. Recreation: Support a variety of recreational opportunities for both local

Goal 5. Public Services: Provide high-quality public services to local residents

Goal 6. Communication, Coordination, Citizen Participation (3C’s): Promote

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 1-4

1.5 Land Development and Conservation Utilization Policies

1.6 Shared Community Values

1.7 Document Organization

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 1-5

Implementation Policies, Regulations and Other Plan Measures builds on the

Intergovernmental Coordination discusses how Madison County will deal with

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 1-6

Please click the map below for a larger/printable map.

Growth Policy 2012 - Summary Page 1-7

Thirteen years later, in response to mounting development pressures in the Madison

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 2-1

2.1 Jurisdictional Area

Montana State Statutes encourage county governments to “...improve the present

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 2-2

A total of 368 questionnaires with responses were returned. This represents

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 2-3

2.5 History of the Growth Policy

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 2-4

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 2-5

2.6 Role of Previous Plans/Policies

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 2-6

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 2-7

3.2 Guiding Principles

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 3-1

3.3 Goals and Objectives

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 3-2

3.3.3 Goal 3. The Environment

3.3.4 Goal 4. Recreation

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 3-3

3.3.6 Goal 6. Communication, Coordination, Citizen Participation (3C’s)

Growth Policy 2012 – Page 3-4

3.4 Land Development and Conservation/Utilization Policies

Table 3-1 - New Development Policies