Can a county-wide skirmish get resolved?

Growth Compels County Discussion To Comprehend Differing Views

By Lucia Stewart, 4-20-07

Park County needs community dialogue, as it is one of the most growth-challenged counties in Southwest Montana.

Recently, the county nearly fell apart after a citizen petition suspended the four-year-in-the-making growth policy. “You are never going to get a 100 percent agreement, but finding a middle ground is important and to stop throwing rocks at each other,” said Harold Blattie, Executive Director of the Montana Association of Counties.

This week, a diverse panel of residents, ranchers, land planners, commissioners, environmental council and development consultants gathered together along with 75 concerned citizens to discuss the challenges at hand.

“Most property being sold in Livingston and surrounding areas is being sold for development reasons,” said Ellen Woodbury, development consultant, on Wednesday night.

Park County (pop.16,000) borders Yellowstone National Park to the north, and contains the booming town of Livingston and the breathtaking Paradise Valley with towering peaks and trout-laden rivers. Until recently, it was a landscape occupied by only ranchers, farmers and those who thrive off remote, windy and wild country.

Second-home owners and cyberspace commuters are moving in at a rapid rate, therefore forcing Park County to create and define zoning, subdivision regulations, private property rights, environmental issues and community aesthetics — and all in one fell swoop. But generation-old land stewards are feeling elbowed by the uncomfortable growth in Park County.

While the population of Park County has grown by 43 percent since 1970, the amount of land developed has grown by 293 percent, according to Park County Planning Office.

Since 1980, 1,748 new residential lots have been created, with additional 99 currently in review. The Sonoran Institute projects an additional 2,100 new homes by 2025, with 5,000 new residents.

The panel on Wednesday night discussed zoning, wildland/urban interface, responsibility to land health, economic vitality, subdivision regulations and process, the Watson and Yellowstone Preserve Annexations, as well as the refuse and recycle situation.

The topic of zoning was a defining conversation in the differing perspectives within Park County.

Although zoning is intended to be instrumental in defining what a city or county will look like in the future, some consider zoning to be restrictive. For example, if a rancher can no longer make a living off the land, but zoning restricts his property from becoming subdivided, then the value of his property is significantly decreased.

“People have a right to live and build any place they like and to take that right away is not right,” said Jerry O’Hair, fourth generation rancher in Park County.

Vicki Blakeman, Livingston city commissioner, said that any local resident who values their viewsheds need to step-up and pay for or assist landowners who are in a rough place and need to sell their land, instead of grip about sprawl and build-up.

Dan Rice, from Printing for Less, Livingston’s biggest employer, said he would not be pleased if, due to zoning regulations, he could not sell his large building to a buyer because of its restricted zoning use.

It was also noted that zoning is good for the reasons that in the neighboring city of Bozeman, new subdivisions have no backyards. “How are kids raised like that?” said Woodbury.

“Zoning is not a black and white issue, it’s a land use regulation tool,” said Mike Inman, Park County Land Use Planner.

One thing the panel did agree on is that communication is essential in finding a middle ground and an understanding of contrasting perspectives.

“How can we keep Paradise in Paradise and what does Paradise look like?” said Jim Barrett, Park County Environmental Council.

The Livingston Weekly and Northern Pacific Beanery hosted the first-ever Livingston/Park County Growth Forum.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.