Docstoc

Townsend Montana Real Estate - DOC

Document Sample
Townsend Montana Real Estate - DOC Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 104



                              INFRASTRUCTURE
For infrastructure, each county’s and city’s description appears separately.

The study-area infrastructure table 4.1 compiles a description of the major infrastructure facilities
within the study area of Lewis and Clark, Broadwater, Northern Jefferson, and Meagher Counties.
The infrastructure facilities in each community are assessed based on a comparison between current
functional capacity, current population demand, and geographic location to determine the capacity
status of each infrastructure facility and the facilities’ ability to support growth.

The communities of East Helena, Helena, Boulder, Townsend, and White Sulphur Springs as shown
in the table are currently functioning under the estimated capacity of all infrastructure facilities
including water, wastewater, power, natural gas, traffic, railroad, airport, and public transportation.
As a result, each of these communities are rated good to excellent in their ability to support
economic growth in terms of infrastructure.

The communities of Wolf Creek, Craig, Augusta, and Lincoln are functioning below infrastructure
capacity in the areas of power, natural gas, traffic, railroad, airport, and public transportation. The
growth potential in these areas is however, held back by capacity limitations in the water and
wastewater facilities. Due to geologic and environmental restrictions it is difficult to expand water
and wastewater systems particularly larger systems accommodating population growth. Refer to the
water, wastewater, and geologic descriptions in these areas for details.

Although many residents and businesses within the study area have Internet service, high-speed
high capacity Internet service is unavailable in certain locations within the study area. High-speed
Internet service is largely dependent on private enterprise and is market driven. The lack of high-
speed Internet service negatively influences economic growth potential in many portions of the
study area.

Table 4.1

COMMUNITY           SYSTEM              SYSTEM TYPE            UNDER/OVER ABILITY TO
                                                               CAPACITY   SUPPORT
                                                                          DEVELOPMENT
East Helena         Water               Groundwater               Under
                                        Treatment*
                    Wastewater          Central Mechanical          Under                  XX
                                        Treatment*
                    Power               Overhead and                Under                  XX
                                        Underground
                                        Distribution
                                        System
                    Natural Gas         Underground                 Under                  XX
                                        Distribution
                                        System
                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                  INFRASTRUCTURE               Page105

          Traffic           Complex                  Under                XX
                            Urban/Rural
          Railroad          Burlington               Under                 X
                            Northern SantaFe,
                            Montana Rail Link
          Airport           Helena Regional          Under                XX
                            Airport
          Internet          AT&T, Global Net,        Under                 X
                            Helenet, Infomine,
                            MCN, Montana
                            Internet
                            Corporation
                            More Wire Inc.,
                            Multiband
                            Communications,
                            Onemain.com,
                            Onewest.net,
                            Qwest Internet
                            Services
          Public            East Helena Senior       Under
          Transportation    Center, Rimrock
                            Trailways, Capitol
                            Taxi

COMMUNITY SYSTEM           SYSTEM TYPE           UNDER/OVER         ABILITY TO
                                                  CAPACITY           SUPPORT
                                                                   DEVELOPMENT
Helena    Water            Ground/Surface            Under              XX
                           Water Treatment
          Wastewater       Central Mechanical        Under                XX
                           Treatment
          Power            Overhead and              Under                XX
                           Underground
                           Distribution System
          Natural Gas      Underground               Under
                           Distribution System
          Traffic          Complex Rural             Under                 X
          Railroad         Burlington Northern       Under                XX
                           SantaFe, Montana
                           Rail Link
          Airport          Helena Regional           Under                XX
                           Airport




                                    Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                      INFRASTRUCTURE                Page 106

             Internet         AT&T, Global Net,          Under                 X
                              Helenet, Infomine,
                              MCN, Montana
                              Internet Corporation
                              More Wire Inc.,
                              Multiband
                              Communications,
                              Onemain.com,
                              Onewest.net, Qwest
                              Internet Services,
                              Touch America
             Public           Big Sky Care               Under                 X
             Transportation   Center, Citizens
                              Advocate Office,
                              Cooney
                              Convalescent Home,
                              Dev., Disabilities
                              Planning, Family
                              Outreach Inc., G&L
                              Transit Inc., Helena
                              Dial-a-Ride, Indian
                              Alliance-Elderly
                              Center,
                              Neighborhood
                              Center, Rocky
                              Mountain Dev.
                              Council, Silver
                              Linings Inc., Spring
                              Meadow Resources,
                              St. Peter’s Hospital-
                              TCU, Westmont,
                              Rimrock Trailways,
                              Capitol Taxi


COMMUNITY SYSTEM                SYSTEM TYPE           UNDER/OVER        ABILITY TO
                                                       CAPACITY          SUPPORT
                                                                       DEVELOPMENT
Wolf Creek   Water              Private Wells            Limited             -
             Wastewater         Private Septic           Limited                -
                                Systems
             Power              Overhead and             Under                XX
                                Underground
                                Distribution
                                System
             Natural Gas        Underground              Under                XX
                                Distribution
                                System
                                        Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE                Page107

          Traffic          Rural                    Under
          Railroad         Burlington                N/A                   -
                           Northern SantaFe-
                           Closed
          Airport          N/A                       N/A                  X
          Internet         Qwest                    Under                 -
          Public           Dearborn Senior          Under                 X
          Transportation   Center, Rimrock
                           Trailways, Capitol
                           Taxi




COMMUNITY SYSTEM           SYSTEM TYPE          UNDER/OVER         ABILITY TO
                                                 CAPACITY           SUPPORT
                                                                  DEVELOPMENT
Craig     Water            Private Wells            Limited             -
          Wastewater       Private Septic           Limited                -
                           Systems
          Power            Overhead and             Under                XX
                           Underground
                           Distribution
                           System
          Natural Gas      Underground              Under                XX
                           Distribution
                           System
          Traffic          Rural                    Under                XX
          Railroad         Burlington                N/A                   -
                           Northern SantaFe-
                           Closed
          Airport          N/A                       N/A                  X
          Internet         Qwest                    Under                 -
          Public           Rimrock                  Under                 X
          Transportation   Trailways, Capitol
                           Taxi


COMMUNITY SYSTEM           SYSTEM TYPE          UNDER/OVER         ABILITY TO
                                                 CAPACITY           SUPPORT
                                                                  DEVELOPMENT
Augusta   Water            Private Wells            Limited             -
          Wastewater       Total Retention        *At/Under               X
                           Lagoons*


                                   Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE                Page 108

          Power            Overhead and             Under                XX
                           Underground
                           Distribution
                           System
          Natural Gas      Underground              Under                XX
                           Distribution
                           System
          Traffic          Rural                    Under                XX
          Railroad         N/A                       N/A                  -
          Airport          Augusta Airport          Under                 X
          Internet         Three Rivers             Under                 -
                           Communications
          Public           Augusta Senior           Under                 X
          Transportation   Center


COMMUNITY SYSTEM           SYSTEM TYPE          UNDER/OVER         ABILITY TO
                                                 CAPACITY           SUPPORT
                                                                  DEVELOPMENT
Lincoln   Water            Private Wells            Limited             -
          Wastewater       Step System and           Under
                           Lagoons
          Power            Overhead and             Under                XX
                           Underground
                           Distribution
                           System
          Natural Gas      N/A                       N/A                   -
          Traffic          Rural                    Under                 X
          Railroad         N/A                       N/A                  -
          Airport          Lincoln Airport          Under                 X
          Internet         Qwest                    Under                 -
          Public           Lincoln Senior           Under                 X
          Transportation   Center, Rimrock
                           Trailways, Capitol
                           Taxi



COMMUNITY SYSTEM           SYSTEM TYPE          UNDER/OVER         ABILITY TO
                                                 CAPACITY           SUPPORT
                                                                  DEVELOPMENT
Boulder   Water            Ground Water             Under               -
                           Treatment
          Wastewater       Lagoons                  Under

                                   Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                  INFRASTRUCTURE                Page109

           Power            Overhead and             Under                XX
                            Underground
                            Distribution
                            System
           Natural Gas      Underground              Under                  -
                            Distribution
           Traffic          Rural                    Under                 X
           Railroad         N/A                       N/A                  -
           Airport          Boulder Airport          Under                 X
           Internet         Qwest                    Under                 -
           Public           Boulder Basin            Under                 X
           Transportation   Senior Center,
                            Montana
                            Developmental
                            Center, Rimrock
                            Trailways, Capitol
                            Taxi, City Taxi



COMMUNITY SYSTEM            SYSTEM TYPE          UNDER/OVER         ABILITY TO
                                                  CAPACITY           SUPPORT
                                                                   DEVELOPMENT
Townsend   Water            Groundwater              Under              XX
                            Supply
           Wastewater       Central Lagoons*         Under                XX
           Power            Overhead and             Under                XX
                            Underground
                            Distribution
                            System
           Natural Gas      N/A-Underground          Under                  -
                            Propane Service In
                            City
           Traffic          Rural                    Under                 X
           Railroad         Montana Rail Link        Under                XX
           Airport          Townsend Airport         Under                 X
           Internet         AT&T, Qwest              Under                 -
           Public           Broadwater Health        Under                 X
           Transportation   Center, Senior
                            Citizens Club,
                            Rimrock
                            Trailways, Capitol
                            Taxi



                                    Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE                  Page 110

COMMUNITY SYSTEM                         SYSTEM TYPE           UNDER/OVER ABILITY TO
                                                               CAPACITY   SUPPORT
                                                                          DEVELOPMENT
White Sulphur      Water                 Ground/Surface        Under      XX
Springs                                  Water
                                         Treatment*
                   Wastewater            Lagoons                     Under                  X
                   Power                 Overhead and                Under                 XX
                                         Underground
                                         Distribution
                                         System
                   Natural Gas           N/A                          N/A                    -
                   Traffic               Rural                       Under
                   Railroad              N/A                          N/A                   -
                   Airport               White Sulphur               Under                  X
                                         Springs Airport
                   Internet              Qwest                       Under                  -
                   Public                Meagher County              Under                  X
                   Transportation        Senior Center,
                                         MountainVeiw
                                         Medical Center

Planned or Recent Upgrades
XX = Excellent
X = Good
- = Moderate to Poor

Detailed inventories of each infrastructure sector are presented in the following sections of this
chapter.

Water Systems
This section contains a description of types, characteristics, and needs of the water systems in the
research area. These systems are described in a manner relevant to the improvements necessary for
economic growth in the area. Water systems discussed include the Helena and East Helena systems
as well as the water systems of Wolf Creek, Craig, Augusta, Lincoln, Boulder, Townsend, and
White Sulphur Springs. Also included is a general discussion of the small systems and aquifers in
Lewis and Clark, Northern Jefferson, Broadwater, and Meagher Counties.

           i. Lewis and Clark County

                   a. City of East Helena

                   1. Characteristics

The East Helena water system consists of two general sources. The McClellan source is an
infiltration gallery with two radial wells, and the Wylie Drive source is a system of three deep
                                                  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page111

groundwater wells. These sources service a network of transmission pipes that range in size from
two inches to twelve inches. The majority of mains in town are six inches and eight inches while
the transmission mains connecting the sources to the distribution system range from eight inches to
twelve inches diameter.

East Helena currently has 1,550,000 gallons of water storage in the form of three reservoirs. A
1,000,000 gallon buried pre-stressed concrete reservoir was constructed in 1999. Also, two side-by-
side reservoirs are located near the McClellan source. The older of these two was constructed in
1928 and has a capacity of 250,000 gallons. The newer tank holds 300,000 gallons and was built in
1948. Both of these are buried concrete reservoirs. The system is capable of providing a fire flow
of 4,000 gpm for four hours through approximately 90 hydrants evenly spaced around the city with
typical spacing of 400 – 500 feet.

                  2. Supply

The McClellan source has two radial wells, each of which, have two laterals approximately twelve
feet beneath the ground surface. The combined capacity of the two radial wells is approximately
700 gpm. The series of wells along Wylie Drive have a total capacity of approximately 1,350 gpm
giving a total system capacity of 2,050 gpm. (RPA 1999)

                  3. Supply and Demand

It is estimated the existing water system could serve approximately twice the current population of
East Helena depending largely on the needed fire flow requirement of any future annexations.

                  4. Current Needs

Having completed the 1999 improvement project, which included 35,000 linear feet of water main
replacement, a new 1-MG concrete tank, and three new vertical turbine groundwater pumps, East
Helena has no immediate system improvement needs. Table 4.2 illustrates the layout of the East
Helena system including the 1999 improvements.


         Table 4.2
         Distribution Storage Reservoir Capacities
         City of Helena Water System

         Reservoir                              Type                  Volume a (MG)
         Woolston No. 1                         Masonry                   3.1

         Woolston No. 2                         Concrete                  3.1

         Malben                                 Steel                      4

         Hale                                   Masonry                   2.2

         Upper Hale                             Concrete                  0.2

                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 112

         Winne No. 1                             Steel                     0.5

         Winne No. 2                             Steel                     0.5

         East Side                               Concrete                   4

                                                 TOTALS                   17.6
          a
           storage volume of reservoir. 5 MG clearwell at the TWTP also for emergency
         supply
         b
           Reservoir volume that is usable during normal water demands

                   b. City of Helena

                   1.   Characteristics

The City of Helena receives its drinking water from three different sources. The Ten Mile,
Missouri River, and Hale Systems provide source water to a network of reservoirs and pump
stations that supply water to the pressure zones operating the City Helena’s water system. The city
system incorporates eight storage reservoirs, which hold the city’s operational, emergency, and fire
storage. Table 4.2 contains a listing of the type, volume, and effective capacity of each of the water
storage reservoirs.

                   2. Supply

The Ten Mile System is the largest contributor to the City of Helena water supply. This system
contributes approximately 1,340 MG/yr. or 69 percent of Helena’s total water supply. Water from
the Ten-Mile system is treated at the Ten Mile Water Treatment Plant (TWTP) and conveyed to the
city through a gravity system. The TWTP complies with 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act standards
and has a capacity of 19 mgd. The system however, supplies only 8.0 to 8.5 mgd due to capacity
limitations of gravity transmission lines, as reported in the 1997 City of Helena Master Plan
Update.

The Ten Mile drainage system has an estimated yield of 1960 MG/yr. as reported in the 1978
master plan and is sufficient to handle the current production needs of the City of Helena. A small
drainage area and hydraulic cycle fluctuations that adversely affect supply volumes on a periodic
basis limit the system.

The Missouri River Supply System is the City of Helena’s most reliable drinking water supply. The
system contributes approximately 272 MG/yr. or 14 percent of the city's total annual water supply.
The city of Helena purchases 600-acre feet or 195.5 MG/yr. of Missouri River Water Treatment
Plant (MRWTP). Additional Missouri River water is available for purchase by the city up to 5,600-
acre feet or 1,850 MG/yr. This system is primarily a summer supply source adding additional water
in times of heavy irrigation and must be pumped from the treatment plant to the city supply grid, as
reported in the 1997 City of Helena Master Plan Update.




                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                           INFRASTRUCTURE                Page113

The Hale System consists of a combination of the Oro Fino and Eureka collector and well pump
systems. This system contributes a combined 320 MG/yr., or 17 percent of the Helena water
supply. The Hale System is currently untreated, as it has historically met water quality standards.
However, as the system does incorporate shallow wells, the threat of surface water contamination is
increasing and the City of Helena will abandon this supply if changes in water quality occur. This
recommendation is based on information provided by the 1997 City of Helena Water Master Plan
Update.

Deep aquifer groundwater is an additional source of city water currently under investigation. The
City of Helena has water rights to an additional 2,300 MG/yr. of groundwater to be taken from the
deep aquifer under the Helena Valley. There are however, concerns of shallow aquifer impacts in
the Helena area if a large quantity of water is taken from the deep aquifer. Recent consecutive dry
years have prevented normal recharge of the shallow aquifer used by many Helena Valley residents
outside the city system. Tapping the deep aquifer for use by the city system raises concerns of
negative impacts on the shallow groundwater level and ultimately the available water supply of
rural residents. The 1997 City of Helena Master Plan further addresses this issue.


                      3.    Supply and Demand

The City of Helena water system’s supply and demand relationships are based on 2000 Montana
Census data, and the 1978 and 1996 Master Plan documents. 2000 Census data indicates a slight
change in population within the city’s water service area from the 1996 master plan population.
The 1996 Master Plan indicates a service area population of approximately 26,000 residents where
the 2000 Census shows a city population 25,780. This current number does not account for the
resident living outside the city limits using the city water system. The difference is slight and
validates the 1997 Master Plan supply and demand relationships and projections for current
examination. Table 4.3 illustrates the historical and projected water supply/demand relationship for
the City of Helena system.

      Table 4.3
     Source Water Capacity and Usage Estimates
     City of Helena Water Supply
         Source                 Firm Capacity      Percent of   Current    Percent of Projected Percent of
                                  Estimates          Total       Annual      Total      Future    Total
                                  (MG/YR)                        Usage e                Usage f
                                                                (MG/yr)                (MG/yr

     Ten Mile Supply                 1960a            47          1340        69        1600        62

     Missouri River                  1850b            44          272         14        1000        38

     Oro Fino Collector              150c              4          112          6

     Eureka Collector                200c              5          208         11

     TOTALS                          4160             100                     100       2600       100

     a
         As reported in 1978 Master Plan Report.
                                                           Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                         INFRASTRUCTURE        Page 114
     b
       Contractual upper limit.
     c
       Based on historical flow measurements.
     e
       Based upon historical data 1990-1996
     f
       Estimates for year 2020. Annual sewage projected at 1600 MG/yr.

                   4.    Future Needs

Future needs of the City of Helena water systems are included in a Capital Improvements Plan
detailed by the 1995 Master Plan. Phase II, planned for 2002–2007, includes additional east side
pipelines (located west of I-15), the Dalhausen Pump Station, Main Street piping improvements,
and two additional deep aquifer wells or a new treatment plant. Phase III of the Capital
Improvements Plan, planned for 2007–2020, includes a new storage tank at the Malben site,
Woolston reservoir improvements, and additional groundwater wells. All of these planned
improvements are designed to accommodate the projected growth of the City of Helena to a
population of 35,000 service-area residents by the year 2020.

               c. Town of Wolf Creek

                   1.   Characteristics

The Town of Wolf Creek has no central water system. The residents are provided with drinking
water through individual private wells. Water tenders serviced by the Missouri River provide fire
protection for the residents and businesses.

                   2.    Supply and Demand

The water supply in Wolf Creek is provided by the Missouri River alluvial aquifer and is not
currently faced with water quality or capacity issues.

                   3.    Current Needs

Growth in this rural area is forecasted to be slow over the next 20-year period according to
projections of the 2000 Census. Montana Rural Water Inc., expects the current private well water
system will provide an adequate drinking water supply over this interval. Fire suppression
requirements will grow with the town and the Missouri River will provide an adequate and
consistent reserve of available water in a fire emergency.

               d. Town of Craig

                   1. Characteristics

The Town of Craig has no central water system. The residents are provided with drinking water
through individual private wells. Water tenders serviced by the Missouri River provide fire
protection for the residents and businesses.




                                                      Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                               INFRASTRUCTURE              Page115

2.                Supply and Demand

The water supply in Craig is provided by the Missouri River alluvial aquifer according to Montana
Rural water Inc., is not faced with water quality or capacity issues.

                  3. Current Needs

The 2000 Census forecasts slow growth in this rural area over the next 20-year period. The current
private well-water system is expected to provide an adequate drinking supply over the next 20-year
interval. Likewise, fire suppression requirements will grow with the town and the Missouri River
will provide an adequate and consistent reserve of available water in a fire emergency.

              e. Town of Augusta

                  1. Characteristics

The Town of Augusta has no central water system. Residents are provided with drinking water
through individual private wells. Water tenders used by the Augusta Fire Volunteer Fire
Department provide the only fire protection for the town.

                  2. Supply

The shallow Sun River alluvial aquifer at 12 – 40 feet deep provides the drinking water in Augusta.
Currently there are no water quality or capacity issues with the shallow supply.

                  3. Current Needs

The water supply system in Augusta has no current needs and is expected to accommodate the
expected growth over the next 20 years.

               f. Town of Lincoln

                  1. Characteristics

The Town of Lincoln has no central water system. The 1,100 residents are provided with drinking
water through individual private wells. Water tenders serviced by the Blackfoot River provide fire
protection to the town.

                  2. Supply and Demand

The Blackfoot Rim alluvial system provides the groundwater supply to the Town of Lincoln.
Currently there are no water quality concerns with the drinking water supply.

                  3. Current Needs

The Blackfoot Rim alluvial aquifer is currently accommodating the residential demand in the Town
of Lincoln and the individual supply system has no current needs. Nick Clos of Montana Rural


                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                               INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 116

Water Inc., suggests if the population of Lincoln experiences rapid growth a central community
water system may be necessary.

       ii.     Northern Jefferson County

               a. Town of Boulder

                  1. Characteristics

The Town of Boulder receives its water from a series of four, 80- to 160-feet-deep wells that supply
water directly to the city water supply grid. The excess water from these wells is pumped to the
500,000-gallon Capital Hill Head Tank that serves as a pressure regulator for the system and is used
to hold emergency and fire suppression reserves. The water supply for the Town of Boulder is
currently untreated with no water quality concerns and is distributed through a system largely
consisting of PVC pipes ranging from 6 inches to twelve inches in diameter. Larger pipes serve
areas such as the school and the courthouse. The fire suppression system consists of 63 hydrants
placed at every roadway intersection in town.

                  2. Supply and Demand

The population of the Town of Boulder is relatively unchanged from 1990 at 1,300 residents
according to the 2000 Census results. Therefore, there has been no appreciable increase in demand
on the water system in that time. The Town of Boulder does not closely monitor the annual water
demand on the system but, according to Greg Gill, Public Works Director, the town is putting
demands on the water system that are less than 50 percent of the systems’ capacity.

                  3. Current Needs

The Town of Boulder having a new properly functioning water system has no current water system
needs. Greg Gill indicated the system is capable of supporting a larger demand, and open to an
increase in area population.

       iii. Broadwater County

              a. City of Townsend

                  1. Characteristics

The City of Townsend’s water system consists of a series of three wells, which feed directly to the
distribution grid and a 200,000-gallon elevated tank. Wells one and two are used year round while
well three is used only during the irrigation season to provide additional volume. The elevated tank
holds 200,000 gallons of fire emergency reserves and feeds a system of older six-to eight-inch
trancite and PVC water pipes through the City of Townsend with approximately 90 psi of operating
pressure.

                  2. Supply



                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE              Page117

The three wells supplying water to the City of Townsend tap a groundwater aquifer 50–60 feet deep
and supply water to the system at approximately 300–700 gallons per minute. This groundwater
source is untreated at present and has no water quality concerns other than hard water
characteristics.

                   3. Supply and Demand

Townsend’s current population is 1,867 residents according to the 2000 Census, and puts demands
on its water system, which according to Bill Herrington, Public works Director, are well under the
system capacity. Exact numbers corresponding to the supply and demand are unavailable as the
Townsend water system has very few water meters and the Public Works Department has not
closely monitored the supply and demand characteristics of the system. The Public Works
Department estimates current demand on the system at approximately 60 percent of the system
capacity.

                   4. Current Needs

The Townsend system distributes its water through a system of older trancite and PVC pipes most
of which were installed in the 1950s. Mineral characteristics of the area soils are causing corrosion
problems on the older pipe sections. Subsequently, Townsend is addressing correction of leakage
concerns due to corrosion of the older pipes and currently upgrading older sections of the system as
well as problem areas according to Bill Herrington.


       iv. Meagher County

              a.   Town of White Sulphur Springs

                   1.   Characteristics

White Sulphur Springs is supplied with drinking water by a combination of two wells and Willow
Creek. The creek supply is serviced through a sand filter and this supply along with the water
supplied by the two wells is treated with chlorine. The town’s water system is gravity driven and
distributes its water to the 948 residents through a system of two- to twelve-inch PVC and steel
pipes. The system holds 450,000 gallons of fire reserves in a buried concrete tank and has fire
service hydrants evenly spaced on two block intervals around town.

                   2. Supply and Demand

The White Sulphur Springs water supply is currently functioning under a demand of 300,000
gallons per day and has no water quality or supply capacity issues. Most of the town’s water supply
is provided by Willow Creek while the wells are used to supplement the supply when needed.
Currently the well pumps are used every other day.




                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                  INFRASTRUCTURE                Page 118

                   3. Current Needs


The White Sulphur Springs water system includes approximately two miles of twelve-inch steel pipe. This
pipe was installed in 1948 and due to leakage concerns is in need of replacement. The town is currently
planning to reconstruct their slow sand filter. (Ed Rasmussen, Public Works Department).


       v. Water Systems and Aquifers of Lewis and Clark County

Private water systems in Lewis and Clark County are primarily individual wells drawing water from
either shallow alluvial or bedrock supply aquifers. Most of the northern portions of the county are
supplied drinking water via shallow bedrock and alluvial aquifers showing varied characteristics
and are not fully understood. Current groundwater yield and water-quality data from the Montana
Bureau of Mines suggests these aquifers are very productive and have no water quality problems.
However, theses shallow aquifers are susceptible to contamination by wastewater treatment and
contaminant spills. Table 4.4 details the average groundwater yields in key areas around the
county.

     Table 4.4
     Groundwater Supply Information

     Town/ City              County           Average Yield Average Water             Total
                                              (gpm)         Depth (feet)              Depth
                                                                                      (feet)

     Helena                  Lewis and               28                  51               140
                             Clark

     East Helena             Lewis and               36                  20                70
                             Clark

     Augusta                 Lewis and               25                  13                35
                             Clark

     Lincoln                 Lewis and               22                  26                79
                             Clark

     Craig                   Lewis and               29                  28                63
                             Clark

     Wolf Creek              Lewis and               42                  47               108
                             Clark

     Boulder                 Jefferson              100                  34               147


     Clancy                  Jefferson               21                  26               129

                                                  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE               Page119


     Jefferson City         Jefferson              26                  40               154


     Montana City           Jefferson              22                 193               387


     Townsend               Broadwater             49                  50               116


     White Sulphur          Meagher                44                  33               82
     Springs


The southern portion of the county (primarily the Helena Valley) is serviced by the shallow alluvial
aquifer, which extends under most of the Helena Valley floor. This is a very productive aquifer, as
shown by the groundwater yield data on table 4.4, and provides the sole water supply to more than
13,000 residents through individual and community wells. Continued monitoring of the aquifer by
county and state agencies reveals this water supply at less than 100 feet below the ground surface is
susceptible to seasonal static water level fluctuations as well as contamination by wastewater
treatment, industrial discharge, storm water runoff, and accidental contaminant spills.

Current water quality analysis by the Water Quality District indicates the groundwater is in good
condition in the Helena Valley. Future water quality issues may stem from shallow topsoil depth
and low plant uptake characteristics can lead to an increase in groundwater nitrate levels as
additional private septic systems are added to the area (Cathy Moore, Department of Sanitation).

As discussed in the Montana Groundwater Assessment, Lewis and Clark County has experienced
consecutive dry years, which have prevented normal groundwater recharge in supply aquifers.
These dry years have produced noticeable reductions in static groundwater levels in and around the
Helena area. To counteract this loss of available water, residents, as well as communities, are
exploring the deep aquifer under the alluvial aquifer as a reliable water source. The Montana
Groundwater Assessment indicated tapping the deep aquifer under the Helena Valley will have
additional negative impacts on the shallow alluvial aquifer leading to a further drop in static water
levels and continued loss of the shallow groundwater supply.

Lewis and Clark County and the Montana Bureau of Mines are currently monitoring the
groundwater quality and supply levels in this region. Future economic and population growth must
be sensitive to the possible negative impacts on the water supply and directed to areas in the region
that have groundwater characteristics favorable to support growth.

       vi.      Small Systems and Aquifers of Northern Jefferson County

The majority of drinking water in Northern Jefferson County is provided through individual private
wells tapping both the Helena Valley alluvial aquifer and a variety of isolated deep aquifers. Table
4.4 lists the average yield, average static water depth, and average total depth of the wells in
Northern Jefferson County. From this data it is clear supply aquifers in the area are providing a
sufficient groundwater supply to the residents. The 2001 Montana Groundwater Assessment
reveals over the last four years the area has experienced drought conditions preventing normal
                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                              INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 120

groundwater recharge to some of the area aquifers. The lack of recharge along with an increase in
area population has put demands on the water supplies approaching the limits of the water supply
(Cathy Moore, Department of Sanitation). The communities of Montana City, Jefferson City,
Clancy, and Boulder are key areas of concern for the Jefferson County water supply.




                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE              Page121

Montana City does not have a central community water system. Residents receive drinking water
from individual wells ranging in dept from 50 – 400 feet. New subdivisions in Montana City
distribute drinking water and fire protection services to the residents of the subdivisions via
centralized and shared systems. These shared systems are only part of the new subdivisions and not
the community as a whole. Fire protection for the town is provided by a combination of the
Montana City and Clancy Fire Departments. Drinking water for Montana City is provided by the
Helena Valley aquifer, as this aquifer has experienced four consecutive dry years, which have
prevented normal groundwater recharge, the residents are beginning to experience a drop in
groundwater level. (Montana Bureau of Mines, monitoring wells).

Montana City it self sufficient in providing water to its residents. The individual wells servicing
established residents and the central systems servicing the new subdivisions are functioning
properly with no water quality concerns. The current water supply techniques utilized by Montana
City may struggle to accommodate the expected 20-year growth in the area if drought conditions
persist. As the population grows and puts increasing demands on the already stressed aquifer, a
centralized water system drawing water from ground and surface water sources may be a solution to
water supply concerns for continued growth in Montana City.

Jefferson City, like Montana City does not have a municipal water system. The residents receive
their drinking water from individual private wells and are provided fire protection by the Clancy
Fire Department. The water supply for Jefferson City is experiencing slight arsenic contamination
from the up-gradient mining operations.

The Jefferson City water supply is provided by an aquifer, which has not experienced the recent
groundwater recharge problems affecting other aquifers. Table 4.4 shows the current average well
yields in the area.

The Community of Clancy also does not have a municipal water system. The 1,406 residents
receive drinking water from individual well ranging in depth from 15 – 40 feet and are provided fire
protection by the tender trucks of the Clancy Fire Department. The shallow aquifer providing
drinking water to the community is also experiencing low recharge problems and has Radio-
Nucleotide levels that are acceptable in private systems but approaching Montana state limits in
public systems.

As the current and expected future population of Clancy crowd into a limited area, drinking water
wells will come in conflict with septic system drain fields the need for a central water or wastewater
system will increase. A new municipal water system for Clancy may relieve the stress on the
supply aquifer, the congestion of private wells and septic drain fields as well as add fire protection
reserves to the community.

To date, the Northern Jefferson County area is supplied with high quality drinking water, but the
area faces supply limitations and contamination concerns as dry seasons persist and the population
increases. According to Montana Rural Water Systems and the County Sanitarian, community
system construction along with system upgrade and new source exploration may be key factors in
facilitating economic and population growth in the future.




                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                               INFRASTRUCTURE               Page 122


   vii.           Systems and Aquifers of Broadwater County

The central water system of Townsend is the only community water system in Broadwater County.
All of the other residents and communities in the county are provided drinking water through
individual and private wells. The shallow Townsend Valley Aquifer provides the majority of the
water supply to the region. This high producing aquifer is widely characterized by hard water
characteristics but is not closely monitored for other water quality concerns.

As population growth in the Helena area encroaches on Broadwater County and puts new demands
on an unmonitored water supply, groundwater level fluctuations along with possible groundwater
contamination may occur. Broadwater County Sanitarian and Planner Melissa Tuemmler, suggests
new sub-division regulations be installed requiring community water systems in most new
development areas. These community systems will increase the monitoring and control level on the
water supply, decreasing the risk of groundwater contamination and major fluctuations in
groundwater level.

          viii.    Systems and Aquifers of Meagher County

Little information is available concerning the small water systems and aquifer characteristics in
Meagher County. The majority of the drinking water is supplied through individual and private
well systems. The Town of White Sulphur Springs has the only central community water supply
system in the area.

Aquifer and groundwater quality information in Meagher County is limited to monitoring well
information provided by the Montana Bureau of Mines. This information is summarized in Table
4.5 and indicates a shallow high producing aquifer around White Sulphur Springs. The Montana
Bureau of Mines, in an effort to characterize the type, quality, and capacity of the groundwater
aquifers in Meagher County is completing further research.

Table 4.5
Groundwater Supply Information
Town/City          County                Average yield      Static water       Total depth
                                         (gpm)              depth (feet)       (feet)

Helena                  Lewis and               28                 51                 140
                        Clark
East Helena             Lewis and               36                 20                  70
                        Clark
Augusta                 Lewis and               25                 13                  35
                        Clark
Lincoln                 Lewis and               22                 76                  79
                        Clark
Craig                   Lewis and               29                 28                  63
                        Clark
Wolf Creek              Lewis and               42                 47                 108
                        Clark
Boulder                 Jefferson              100                 34                 147

                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                              INFRASTRUCTURE              Page123

Clancy                Jefferson                21                 26                129
Jefferson City        Jefferson                26                 40                154
Montana City          Jefferson                22                193                387
Townsend              Broadwater               49                 50                116
White Sulphur         Meagher                  44                 33                 82
Springs


Table 4.6 Summarizes the types of water systems and the respective current needs of those systems
in the research area.

Table 4.6
Water System Inventory
                  County              Water System
 Town/City                                                System Needs
                     Lewis and        Pressure Zone
 Helena              Clark            System              Main replacement, new tank and
                                                          reservoir repair, additional supply
                     Lewis and        Municipal
 East Helena         Clark            Pressure System     None
                     Lewis and        None
 Augusta             Clark                                None
                     Lewis and        None
 Lincoln             Clark                                None
                     Lewis and        None
 Craig               Clark                                None
                     Lewis and        None
 Wolf Creek          Clark                                None
                     Jefferson        Pressure System
 Boulder                                                  None
                     Jefferson        None
 Clancy                                                   Possible New System
                     Jefferson        None
 Jefferson City                                           None
                     Jefferson        None
 Montana City                                             Possible New System
                     Broadwater       Pressure system
 Townsend                                                 None
                     Meagher          Pressure System
 White Sulphur                                            Main replacement
 Springs




                                               Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 124


Wastewater Systems
This section contains a discussion of the wastewater systems within the study area. Each of the
respective systems is described in an effort to log the types and needs of the existing systems as
population and economic changes occur in the area. Table 4.7 follows this section and is a
summary of the types and current needs of the existing systems in the Helena area.

      i.    Lewis and Clark County Wastewater Systems

               a. City of East Helena

                1. Characteristics

The wastewater system in East Helena is composed of mechanical treatment lagoons, extended
aeration, and activated sludge systems. The effluent from the treatment facility is discharged into
Prickly Pear Creek. Disinfect ion of effluent with chlorine gas is performed during warmer months.
The system currently treats an average daily flow of approximately 0.2 MGD. The system was
originally designed for .63 MGD at a time when ASARCO contributed a great deal of flow. The
collection system consists of approximately ten miles of gravity pipe (primarily vitrified clay), and
one lift station. The collection system is characterized as good to fair condition with a few problem
areas.

                   2. Current Needs

The city was issued a new MPDES Discharge Permit for its municipal treatment works in April
1997. The new permit contains effluent limits more stringent than those previously required.
Process changes are required at the treatment facility, primarily to provide ammonia removal due to
ammonia toxicity requirements in the new permit.

Modifications are scheduled to take place in the summer and fall of 2002. Improvements scheduled
primarily include modifying the existing process to an extended aeration activated sludge process.
Solids handling facilities will also be added. Solids handling improvements will include an aerated
sludge holding basin, sludge thickening process, and drying beds.

The collection system does have some problems with root intrusions and cracked pipes, it is
functional and in satisfactory condition. The only lift station in the system will be upgraded along
with treatment facility improvements during the summer of 2002.


Table 4.7

Helena Area Wastewater System Inventory
                         County                 Wastewater System
Town/City                                                                   System Needs
                         Lewis and Clark        Mechanical Primary and
Helena                                          Secondary Treatment         Odor Control,
                                                                            Collection System
                                                                            Expansion
                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page125

                          Lewis and Clark      Aerated Lagoon System
East Helena                                                                Facility
                                                                           Improvements
                          Lewis and Clark      Total Retention Lagoon
Augusta                                                                    None
                          Lewis and Clark      Step System Lagoons
Lincoln                                                                    None
                          Lewis and Clark      None
Craig                                                                      None
                          Lewis and Clark      None
Wolf Creek                                                                 None
                          Jefferson            Three Celled Lagoon
Boulder                                                                    Main Replacement,
                                                                           Aeration, Sludge
                                                                           Separation
                          Jefferson            None
Clancy                                                                     New Central System
                          Jefferson            None
Jefferson City                                                             None
                          Jefferson            None
Montana City                                                               None
                          Broadwater           Four Celled Lagoon
Townsend                                                                   Upgrade to Collection
                                                                           System Pipes
                          Meagher              2 Total Retention
White Sulphur                                  Lagoons                     None
Springs

                 b. City of Helena

                    1. Characteristics

The wastewater system of the City of Helena is composed of a central mechanical treatment plant
that incorporates primary treatment, secondary treatment with ammonia removal followed by UV
disinfections. This system currently treats approximately 3.5 MGD of influent wastewater collected
by approximately 100 miles of pipe and has a design capacity of 6.2 MGD. Recent upgrades to the
city system include a new secondary treatment process with ammonia removal, UV disinfections
and an expanded sludge thickening process. Sludge is currently land applied. (The
Water/Wastewater Superintendent for the City of Helena provided this information).

                    2. Current Needs

The effluent of the Helena wastewater system is discharged directly to Prickly Pear Creek. The
Montana Department of Environmental Quality regulates central wastewater systems around the
state by setting design standards for new systems and inspecting facilities on a five-year interval.
The City of Helena wastewater system is currently in compliance with the US Clean Water Act, the
Montana Water Quality Act, and the Public Water Supply Act. According to Leonard Willett, City
Water/Wastewater Superintendent, the short and long term needs of the city system include odor

                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                               INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 126

control and expansion of the collection system to accommodate growth within the city and inclusion
of outlying areas to the city system in the future

              c.   Communities of Wolf Creek and Craig

                   1. Characteristics

Neither community of Wolf Creek nor Craig has municipal wastewater systems. The residents of
these communities dispose of their wastewater through individual onsite septic systems.

                      c.      Current Needs

Growth in and around the Wolf Creek and Craig areas is expected to be slow over the next 20 years
due to topographical, high groundwater, and flood plain restraints according to the Lewis and Clark
County Comprehensive Draft Plan. The current individual septic systems appear to be adequate.
Individual septic systems have difficulty supporting larger scale wastewater producers and growth
in the Wolf Creek and Craig area may require the construction of a central community system.

               d. Town of Augusta

                   1. Characteristics

In 1999 the Town of Augusta through the formation of the Augusta Sewer and Water District
completed work on a 24.1-acre total retention evapo-transportation lagoon. This lagoon was
designed for 38,000 gallons per day influent and collects wastewater from the 270 hookups with a
network of eight-inch PVC pipes. Fees levied by the district are intended to fund operating and
maintenance of the lagoon. Wastewater outside the sewer and water district is treated by individual
septic systems.

                   2. Current Needs

The wastewater system in Augusta is new and functioning properly. The system will accommodate
only minimal future growth in the Augusta area and significant population growth may require
upgrading to the wastewater system.

       e. Town of Lincoln

                   1. Characteristics

The wastewater system in Lincoln is described as a STEP system, which collects the gray water
from the individual septic systems in town and transports this water to a facultative lagoon. The
effluent from the lagoon is land applied through spray irrigation to the neighboring landscape. The
lagoon was constructed in 1985 for 1,250 residents and was revamped in 1999 to add an additional
cell. While the current influent of the Lincoln system is unknown, the design influent of the lagoon
is 100,000 gallons per day and the system is functioning properly.




                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page127

                     2. Current Needs

The wastewater system in Lincoln was designed for 1,250 residents. Currently the population of the
town is 1,100 and according to the county sanitarian the system has sufficient functioning capacity
for the expected growth over the next ten years.

      ii.     Northern Jefferson County

                  a. Town of Boulder

                     1. Characteristics

The City of Boulder wastewater system consists of a three-celled facultative lagoon. One cell
functions as a settling pond and the system receives the wastewater from a network of eight to ten
inch gravity fed clay, cast iron, and PVC pipes. The effluent is discharged to the Boulder River

                     2. Current Needs

A portion of Boulder’s wastewater system consists of 40 year old clay tile pipe, Greg Gill, Public
Works Director suggests this pipe is experiencing invasive root and leakage problems demanding
upgrade and or replacement. Likewise, upgrades to the lagoon in the form of aeration in the passive
cells and capacity increases to the sludge separation cell will be a necessity as growth in the area
occurs.

      iii.     Broadwater County

                  a. City of Townsend

                     1. Characteristics

The City of Townsend’s wastewater system consists of a four-celled lagoon. Three cells are
aeration cells and the fourth is a settling pond. Wastewater from the town is delivered to the lagoon
from a lift station on Cedar Street and network of eight inch PVC, trancite, and clay pipes. The
effluent from the lagoon is discharged to a side channel of the Missouri River.

                     2. Current Needs

The four-celled lagoon servicing the City of Townsend was upgraded in 1997 and is functioning
properly. Old trancite and clay pipes in the collections system along with separated taps, settled
piping, and invasive roots are causing leakage and groundwater infiltration problems in the system.
A large quantity of groundwater infiltrates the collection system in some area. Leakage problems
will become a concern as growth occurs in the area, according to the Townsend Public Works
Department. Upgrade of the collection system is a current need of Townsend’s wastewater system.
(Bill Herrington DPW).

iv.         Meagher County

                  b. City of White Sulphur Springs

                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 128


                   1. Characteristics

White Sulphur Springs wastewater system, according to the White Sulphur Springs Public Works
Department, functions on a gravity operated system of six- to eight-inch clay and asbestos pipes
delivering wastewater to two ten-acre facultative lagoons. Wastewater from eight to ten residents in
one section of town is pumped through a lift station to the lagoon. Effluent from the lagoon system
is discharged to the Smith River.

                   2. Current Needs

The wastewater system was designed for a population of 2,500 residents. Currently the town’s
population is 948 according to the 2000 Census, and the wastewater system is functioning at under
half of its influent capacity with no current needs.

                   3. System and Environmental Issues of Lewis and Clark County

While many of the communities in Lewis and Clark County have no central wastewater systems the
majority of wastewater generated in the county is treated through central treatment systems. These
central systems primarily discharge effluents to surface waters or are land applied. The remaining
areas consist of individual septic systems.

Individual septic systems threaten the remainder of the wastewater generated in the county.
Currently these private systems are unmonitored and little is known of their effectiveness. Due to
the unknown characteristics the individual private wastewater systems are the primary contributors
to environmental quality concerns in Lewis and Clark County.

Most of the water supply for residents in and around the communities of Lewis and Clark County
are provided by shallow groundwater aquifers dependent on surface water recharge. Because these
aquifers are shallow and surface waters are the primary source of recharge, the aquifers are
susceptible to contamination by surface water pollutants. Individual septic systems are a possible
contributor to surface water pollutants and cause for environmental concern as the number of
individual systems increases with growth.

The southern portion of Lewis and Clark County, primarily the Helena Valley, is an area
characterized by a shallow groundwater supply. According to 1998 Helena Area Wastewater
Treatment Facility Plan this area is beginning to experience elevated contaminant levels in the
water supply as the number of individual septic systems increase. Growth in Lewis and Clark
County is likely to be focused in this southern portion of the county and must be sensitive to the
environmental issues associated with wastewater disposal. An increase in private system
monitoring along with a trend toward inclusion of outlying areas to community systems must follow
growth in the county.

                   4. System and Environmental Issues of Northern Jefferson County

The wastewater systems of Northern Jefferson County primarily consist of individual septic systems
in rural communities. The wastewater systems in the communities of Clancy, Montana City, and
Jefferson City, which consist of individual septic systems, are a primary interest as growth occurs in
the region.
                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page129


Today, these communities are experiencing the onset of congestion problems between septic
systems and drinking water wells as new residents move into the area. With the exception of
Montana City, which is supplied drinking water by deep bedrock aquifer, the static groundwater
level in Northern Jefferson County is relatively shallow at 15–50 feet. Congestion of septic systems
and individual wells threatens the water quality in the region with groundwater contamination by
wastewater discharge. (Megan Bulloc, Jefferson County).

Northern Jefferson County, outside the communities of Montana City, Jefferson City, and Clancy,
has no wastewater system problems or environmental concerns, as residents are widely spaced and
wastewater discharge is small. Planning for economic and population growth in the region must be
sensitive to septic system congestion and groundwater contamination concerns in key areas.

                   5. Systems and Environmental Issues of Broadwater County

Wastewater disposal in Broadwater County is primarily accomplished through individual and
private septic systems. The City of Townsend has the only central wastewater system in the county.
The county does not closely monitor groundwater or wastewater effluent characteristics of the
individual septic systems scattered throughout the county.

Currently there is not water quality or environmental concerns associated with the wastewater
disposal practices in Broadwater County. As the population of the county expands, an increase in
the number of unmonitored private septic systems may raise the risk of groundwater contamination
and other environmental impacts. Melissa Tumler, Broadwater County Sanitarian and Planner,
believes requirements forcing new residential subdivisions to incorporate and monitor central
wastewater systems may reduce the risk of groundwater contamination and facilitate further growth
in the region.

                   6. Systems and Environmental Issues of Meagher County

With the exception of White Sulphur Springs’ wastewater system the majority of the wastewater in
Meagher County is disposed of through individual private septic systems.

As the population of Meagher County is small and dispersed over a larger area the volume and
concentration of wastewater is minimal. Very little data is available characterizing the groundwater
supply aquifers and the influence of wastewater disposal on the groundwater quality in the county.
The Montana Bureau of Mines is currently compiling information to further detail the aquifer and
groundwater quality characteristics in this region.


Solid Waste Disposal
Most of the Helena Valley is included in the Scratch Gravel Landfill District. The district operates
a Class 2 landfill licensed in 1994 and has an available life of 47 years based upon projections.
Waste from Northern Jefferson County is received on a contractual basis.




                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 130

Recycling is conducted through a partnership between the City of Helena and Lewis and Clark
County. There were 4,117 tons diverted from the landfill in fiscal year 1997, constituting
approximately ten percent of the total waste system. Most commodities are processed through local
private-sector recycling businesses. A green waste composting facility has been available since
1994 and a bio composting of green waste and municipal sewage sludge (which is currently
landslide) will be developed.


Power Service
     iv.   Power Service Available

There are two companies providing power service within the study area; NorthWestern Energy,
formerly Montana Power Company, and Vigilante Electric. NorthWestern Energy was established
in 1912 with the merger of four regional electric companies. Based in Butte, Montana,
NorthWestern Energy provides a regulated electric service to 288,000 electric customers in the
western two-thirds of Montana. NorthWestern Energy’s electric transmission system consists of
over 7,000 miles of transmissions lines and associated terminal facilities. This expansive system
with voltage levels ranging from 50,000 to 500,000 volts, serves an area of 97,540 square miles,
which is equivalent to two-thirds of Montana. NorthWestern Energy system has interconnections to
five major transmission systems located in the Western Systems Coordinating Council (WSCC)
area, as well as one interconnection to a system connecting with the Mid-Continent Area Power
Pool (MAPP) region. (http://www.mtpower.com/energy_home.htm)
With these interconnections, NorthWestern Energy electric transmission system is strategically
located to allow for the purchase and delivery of power in diverse markets—from the Pacific
Northwest to the desert Southwest and California, and to the Colorado area and the MAPP region.

NorthWestern Energy’s main business is the transmission and distribution of electricity, generally
with transmission services being from the power plant to a city substation and distribution service
from there throughout a city.

Vigilante Electric was established in 1936 to service areas NorthWestern Energy did not feel were
profitable at the time. These were areas outside city limits and agricultural communities (Siring,
2002). Based in Dillon, this member-owned utility company provides service to 4,339 electric
customers throughout Beaverhead, Broadwater, Deer Lodge, Gallatin, Jefferson, Lewis and Clark,
Madison, Meagher, and Silverbow Counties in Montana as well as Clark County, Idaho. This
electric company’s transmission system consists of 2,516 miles of transmission lines and average
two to two and a half meters per line (http://www.mtco-
ops.com/vigilante_electric_cooperative.htm).

Table 4.8 lists the areas each power company serves and the description of the service provided.

Table 4.8
Power Service Provided
Location              Power Company               Area of Service*         Description of
                                                                           Service*
East Helena              NorthWestern Energy      City                     Overhead and
                                                                           underground

                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                      INFRASTRUCTURE             Page131

                                                                                distribution system

Helena                        NorthWestern Energy       City and Valley         Overhead and
                                                                                underground
                                                                                distribution system
Wolf Creek                    NorthWestern Energy       Town and outlying       Overhead and
                                                        area                    underground
                                                                                distribution system
Craig                         NorthWestern Energy       Town                    Overhead and
                                                                                underground
                                                                                distribution system
Augusta                       NorthWestern Energy       Town                    Overhead and
                                                                                underground
                                                                                distribution system
Lincoln                       NorthWestern Energy       City and parts of       Overhead and
                                                        valley                  underground
                                                                                distribution system
Boulder                       NorthWestern Energy       City and valley         Overhead and
                                                                                underground
                                                                                distribution system
Townsend                      NorthWestern Energy       City and valley         Overhead and
                                                                                underground
                                                                                distribution system
White Sulphur                 NorthWestern Energy       City and parts of       Overhead and
Springs                                                 valley                  underground
                                                                                distribution system
Lewis and Clark               NorthWestern Energy       Cities and outlying     Overhead and
County                        and Vigilante Electric    areas                   underground
                                                                                distribution system
Northern Jefferson            NorthWestern Energy       Cities and outlying     Overhead and
County                        and Vigilante Electric    areas                   underground
                                                                                distribution system
Broadwater County             NorthWestern Energy       Cities and outlying     Overhead and
                              and Vigilante Electric    areas                   underground
                                                                                distribution system
Meagher County                NorthWestern Energy       Cities and outlying     Overhead and
                                                        areas                   underground
                                                                                distribution system
   *NorthWestern Energy, Howard Skjervem, 2002
   *Vigilante Electric, Rod Siring, 2002


None of the areas listed in table 4.8 have reached their available capacity. While Vigilante Electric
intends to continue providing service outside various city limits and to the surrounding agricultural
communities (Siring, 2002), NorthWestern Energy plans to upgrade the power service to East
Helena and parts of the Helena area (Skjervem, 2002). The plan is to have a 26,000-mile national
fiber network by 2001 to facilitate long-haul voice, data, and video needs as a carrier, while offering
its own last-mile, wireless services, metropolitan fiber offerings, and long distance and internet
applications.

                                                       Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 132

Natural Gas Service
NorthWestern Energy provides natural gas service within the study area. While the company was
established in 1912, the Butte-based establishment did not venture into natural gas until the 1930s.
NorthWestern Energy provides regulated natural gas delivery services generally in the western two-
thirds of Montana. Their gas transportation system consists of more than 2,100 miles of
transmission pipelines, 3,300 miles of distribution pipelines, and three storage facilities all within
Montana. NorthWestern Energy system has pipeline interconnections with NOVA, Havre Pipeline
Company, Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Company, and Colorado Interstate Gas Company.
NorthWestern Energy natural gas service area covers 70,500 square miles serving approximately
141,000 customers.

NorthWestern Energy’s gas transportation services are segregated into two categories: on-system
transportation, which is regulated by the Montana Public Service Commission, and off-system
transportation, which is regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

End-use customers with annual consumption of 5,000 dekatherms or greater can contract for on-
system transportation services. On-system services include firm and interruptible transmission and
distribution transportation and firm storage service. In 1997, NorthWestern Energy transported 20.0
bcf for its on-system customers.

NorthWestern Energy’s off-system transportation service provides shippers with the opportunity to
transport gas across the system for delivery to the interconnecting pipelines noted above. Off-
system service includes off-peak transmission, interruptible transmission and interruptible storage.
In 1997, NorthWestern Energy transported 6.3 bcf for its off-system customers.

Table 4.9 lists areas that have natural gas service and the description of the service provided by
Northwestern Energy.


Table 4.9

Natural Gas Service Available

Location                 Company                   Area of Service*         Description of
                                                                            Service*
East Helena              NorthWestern Energy       City                     Underground
                                                                            distribution system
Helena                   NorthWestern Energy       City and Valley          Underground
                                                                            distribution system
Wolf Creek               NorthWestern Energy       Town                     Underground
                                                                            distribution system
Craig                    NorthWestern Energy       Town                     Underground
                                                                            distribution system
Augusta                  NorthWestern Energy       Town                     Underground
                                                                            distribution system
Lincoln                  None                      N/A                      N/A


                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                          INFRASTRUCTURE            Page133

  Boulder                       NorthWestern Energy         City and part of the    Underground
                                                            valley                  distribution system
  Townsend                      NorthWestern Energy         City                    Propane underground
                                                                                    service in city
  White Sulphur                 None                        N/A                     N/A
  Springs
  Lewis and Clark               NorthWestern Energy         Varies                  Underground
  County                                                                            distribution system
  Northern Jefferson            NorthWestern Energy         Varies                  Underground
  County                                                                            distribution system
  Broadwater County             NorthWestern Energy         Varies                  None except Propane
                                                                                    UG service in
                                                                                    Townsend
  Meagher County                None                        N/A                     N/A
  *NorthWestern Energy, Howard Skjervem, 2002

  None of the areas listed in table 4.9 have reached their available capacity and the NorthWestern
  Energy has no plans to upgrade any portion of their system in the study area (Skjervem, 2002).

  Table 4.10
  Power Summary
                                                AREA OF     DESCRIPTION OF         AT    PLANS TO
LOCATION              COMPANY                   SERVICE          SERVICE        CAPACITY UPGRADE
East Helena                                              Overhead & Underground
               NorthWestern Energy          City         distribution System       No       Yes
Helena                                      City &       Overhead & Underground
               NorthWestern Energy          Valley       distribution System       No     Yes, Parts
Townsend                                    City &       Overhead & Underground
               NorthWestern Energy          Valley       distribution System       No        No
Boulder                                     City & parts Overhead & Underground
               NorthWestern Energy          of Valley distribution System          No        No
Augusta                                                  Overhead & Underground
               NorthWestern Energy          City         distribution System       No        No
White                                       City & parts Overhead & Underground
Sulphur        NorthWestern Energy          of Valley distribution System          No        No
Lincoln                                     City & parts Overhead & Underground
               NorthWestern Energy          of Valley distribution System          No        No
Craig                                                     Overhead & Underground
               NorthWestern Energy          Town          distribution System           No            No
Wolf Creek                                  Town &        Overhead & Underground
               NorthWestern Energy          outlying      distribution System           No            No
Lewis and                                                 Overhead & Underground
Clark County NorthWestern Energy            Varies        distribution System           No            No
Northern
Jefferson                                                 Overhead & Underground
County       NorthWestern Energy            Varies        distribution System           No            No
Broadwater                                                Overhead & Underground
County       NorthWestern Energy            City          distribution System           No            No

                                                           Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                         INFRASTRUCTURE            Page 134

Meagher                                                   Overhead & Underground
County         NorthWestern Energy          City & Valley distribution System          No            No
  *NorthWestern Energy, Howard Skjervem, 2002




  Transportation Systems
  This section contains a discussion of traffic and transportation systems within the study area. An
  inventory of traffic and transportation systems of East Helena, Helena, Wolf Creek, Craig, Augusta,
  Lincoln, Boulder, Townsend, and White Sulphur Springs are detailed in the following narrative.
  Each of the respective systems are described in accordance with its size, capacity, current traffic
  flow, and level of service (LOS). The traffic volume data, level of service information for highway
  sections, and schedules of planned roadway improvements included in this report was obtained
  from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT).

  Level of service as defined by the highway capacity manual ranges from level A through F. LOS A
  represents free-flow conditions. LOS B represents stable conditions but the presence of other users.
  LOS C represents stable flow but marks the beginning of the range of flow in which the operation
  of individual users becomes significantly affected by interactions with other users. LOS D
  represents high density but stable flow. LOS E represents operating conditions at or near the
  roadway capacity level.
  LOS F represents forced or breakdown flow conditions. The current and projected level of service
  as noted by MDT for the major roadways through the research area are illustrated on table 4.11 and
  figure 4.12.

  Roadway capacity for streets and highways are based on the number of driving lanes, physical
  condition of the roadways, and the roadside conditions. These factors can have great affects on the
  capacity of a roadway. However, a general ―rule of thumb‖ guide can be used to quickly estimate
  the approximate capacity of an existing roadway. This guide is presented in table 4.11. This guide
  was used to help determine the existing LOS on roadways not analyzed by MDT.

                 Table 4.11
                 Approximate Capacity Guide for Existing Roadways
                 Road Segment                       Volumes (VPD*)
                 Two Lane Road                                 Up to 12,000
                 Three Lane Road                               Up to 18,000
                 Four Lane Road                                Up to 24,000
                 Five Lane Road                                Up to 35,000
                    *Vehicles per day




                                                          Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                            INFRASTRUCTURE             Page135

Figure 4.12




              Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                   INFRASTRUCTURE                Page 136

       i.   Lewis and Clark County Transportation Systems

               a. City of East Helena

                   1. Characteristics

The City of East Helena is located four miles west of the City of Helena. The community is
primarily accessed by U.S. Route 287, which passes through the southern edge of the city. U.S.
Route 287 and U.S. 12 are the primary connections between Helena and East Helena and are the
main way to Bozeman through the research area. Within the East Helena city limits, the road is five
lanes wide. There is a traffic signal at the intersection of U.S. Route 287 and 1st Street at ASARCO.
East Helena has a variety of other local streets, which make up a grid pattern within the community,
and also has several roads proceeding north into the Helena Valley.

Within the East Helena city limits, U.S. Route 287 has an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume of
15,000 VPD. Traffic volumes on this road have been increasing over the last six years but have
dropped off since the closure of ASARCO in 2001. Within the city of East Helena’s local street
network, the major roadways have traffic volumes between 2,000 and 3,000 vehicles per day.

According to MDT, within the city limits of East Helena, U.S. Route 287 is currently functioning at
LOS A and should remain at this level of service for the next 20 years.

                    2. Current Needs

Currently the roadways in the area are providing an acceptable level of service. Two land roads can
generally carry up to 12,000 vehicles per day and five lane roads can carry up to 35,000 vehicles per
day. No roads within the vicinity of East Helena are close to reaching their capacity. No significant
traffic congestion problems are anticipated in this area over the next 20 years.


               b. City of Helena

                    1. Characteristics

The City of Helena has the largest municipal transportation system within the study area. Helena is
the Capital of the State of Montana and the sixth largest city in the state. Interstate 15 passes along
the eastern edge of the city and U.S. Route 12 (U.S. 287) passes east/west through the city. Helena
has 36 signalized intersections and several four- and five-lane roadways. Montana Avenue is the
largest north/south corridor through the city and has four to five lanes of traffic for its entire length.
The major east/west corridor is U.S. Highway 12 (Highway 287). This route is made up of Euclid
Avenue, Lyndale Avenue, the one-way couplet of Prospect Avenue and 11th Avenue, and a portion
of Montana Avenue. All of these road segments have four to five lanes. Other three-lane segments
exist along Cedar Street and Main Street. A portion of Benton Avenue has four lanes. The highest
traffic volumes occur on these roads, each of which carry between 15,000 and 22,000 vehicles per
day.

According to the Helena Area Transportation Plan, most of the other major two-lane routes within
Helena have an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of less than 10,000 VPD and have not yet

                                                   Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                                         INFRASTRUCTURE                         Page137

reached their theoretical capacity. The exception is Custer Avenue, which is currently carrying over
15,000 VPD on a section of two-lane road, which exceeds the theoretical limit of 12,000 VPD for
two-lane roadways.

For more information regarding traffic conditions within Helena see the Helena Area
Transportation Plan 1993 Update.

                          2. Current Needs

Traffic volumes on Helena’s major roadways are currently growing at a rate of 2.5 percent annually.
At present, most roadways within the City of Helena have traffic volume levels below the
theoretical limit for the system. However, Custer Avenue is over capacity and should be improved.

                          3. Anticipated Future Improvement

There are four improvements scheduled for the Helena area over the next five years. These
improvements include:

              Mill, overlay, seal, and cover project on U.S. 12; Last Chance Gulch to Prospect Avenue
               – 2002.
                       The construction of an additional turn lane on Northern Montana Avenue –
                        2002
                       A reconstruction project on Custer Avenue – scheduled for 2003
                       PCCP rehabilitation on U.S. 12 – 2004

The Federal Highway Administration gave approval in January 2004 to a plan that encompasses
$125 million of I-15 new interchange projects and improvements to existing interchanges. The two
new interchanges will be a South Helena interchange near the border with Jefferson County and a
Custer Avenue interchange. Improvements to existing interchanges will be at the Capitol
interchange and at Lincoln Road. The Montana Department of Transportation will be the lead
agency in implementing this plan. However, MDOT has only $5.8 million for these projects which
will require $125 million. The MDOT in April 2004 allocated $350,000 for engineering design
work on the South Helena interchange and the Custer Avenue interchange. City leaders have
requested $20 million from the U. S. Congress, which is currently considering a six-year highways
bill, for the entire improvements list.
From: Helena Independent Record, 1/30/04,‖Happy Motoring,‖ 4/30/04, Martin Kidston, and ―Design Funds Released for I-15,‖ Jason Mohr.


          c. Wolf Creek and Craig

                          1. Characteristics

The communities of Wolf Creek and Craig lay along I-15 north of Helena. The communities are
small and produce very little traffic. Both communities are accessed via interchanges on I-15 and
by frontage roads. State Secondary 434 also accesses Wolf Creek to the north. In the vicinity of
these two communities I-15 has an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume of 3,400 VPD.
The frontage roads around the communities have an ADT of 400 VPD. Traffic volumes in these
communities have varied little over the last six years.


                                                                    Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                               INFRASTRUCTURE             Page 138

In the vicinity of Wolf Creek, I-15 is currently providing a LOS of A. State Secondary 434 is
providing a LOS of between A and B. In the year 2020 these roads will continue to provide the
same LOS.

                  2. Current Needs

Currently the roadways in the area are providing an acceptable level of service. Roadway traffic
volumes are very low and growth is slow. No significant traffic congestion problems are
anticipated in this area over the next 20 years.


              d. Town of Augusta

                  1. Characteristics

The community of Augusta is located in Northern Lewis and Clark County. It is a small
community primarily accessed by U.S. Route 287 to the south and north and State Secondary 435 to
the west. Traffic volumes on these roads are low. U.S. Route 287 has an AADT volume of 400
VPD. State Secondary 534 has an ADT volume of 200 VPD; traffic volumes in this area have
changed little over the past six years.

All routes within and around the community of Augusta are functioning at LOS B or higher and
should continue to function at the LOS for the next 20 years.

                  2. Current Needs

Currently the roadways in the area are providing an acceptable level of service. Roadway traffic
volumes are relatively light and growth is slow. No significant traffic congestion problems are
anticipated within the community of Augusta within the next 20 years.

                  3. Anticipated Future Improvement

There is a project scheduled for 2006 to reconstruct the intersection of Bowman’s Corner, a
dangerous intersection near Augusta.

              e. Town of Lincoln

                  1. Characteristics

The Town of Lincoln is located along MT 200, the major route connecting Missoula and Great Falls
in western Lewis and Clark County. The town is primarily accessed by MT 200, which passes
through the northern edge of the community from east to west. Within the Town of Lincoln MT
200 carries approximately 3,500 VPD. Outside the town, the AADT on MT 200 is 1,800 VPD.
Lincoln has a variety of other local streets within the community. Traffic volumes within the area
are relatively low. Traffic volumes in this area have changed little over the past six years.




                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE               Page139

               2. Current Needs

Currently the roadways in the area are providing an acceptable lever of service. Roadway traffic
volumes are relatively light and growth is slow. No significant traffic congestion problems are
anticipated in or around Lincoln within the next 20 years.

       ii. Northern Jefferson County

               a. Town of Boulder

                   1. Characteristics

The Town of Boulder is primarily accessed by an interchange with I-15 to the north and State Route
69 and Secondary 399 to the south. State Route 69 passes through the community and connects to
the I-15 interchange. Boulder has a variety of other local street and frontage roads accessing the
rural parts of the community. Traffic volume counts within the area indicate I-15 has an AADT of
3,100 VPD north of the interchange and an AADT of 2,500 VPD south of the interchange. State
Route 69 has an AADT of 900 VPD south of city limits. No traffic volume data was available for
roadways within the city limits. Traffic volumes in this area have changed little over the past six
years.

In the vicinity of Boulder, I-15 is currently providing a LOS of A. State Route 69 is providing a
LOS of between A and B south of the city limits and LOS of C within the city limits. Secondary
399 is providing a LOS between A and C.

                   2. Current Needs

Currently the roadways in the area are providing an acceptable level of service. Roadway traffic
volumes are relatively light and growth is slow. No significant traffic congestion problems are
anticipated in this area over the next 20 years. There is a reconstruction project for Main Street
(State Route 69) in Boulder and a seal and cover project I-15 between Basin and Boulder scheduled
for early 2002. Additionally, there is a rest area planned for construction along I-15 in Boulder for
the year 2006.

       iii. Broadwater County

               a. City of Townsend

                   1. Characteristics

The City of Townsend is primarily accessed by U.S. Route 287, which passes through the western
portion of the city and U.S. Route 12, which begins at an intersection with U.S. Route 287 and
proceeds east through Townsend and into the Broadwater County. Townsend has a variety of other
local streets, making up a grid pattern within the community. U.S. Route 287 is a major commuter
route between Helena and Townsend as well as the main road between Townsend and Bozeman.
Traffic volume counts within the area indicate U.S. Route 287 has an AADT of 6,000 VPD near the
intersection with U.S. Route 12. This section of U.S. Route 12 has recently been improved to three-
lane facility within the city limits. North of the city limits, U.S. Route 287 has an AADT volume of

                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 140

4,300 VPD and an AADT of 3,400 VPD south of the city limits. U.S. Route 12 has an ADT of
4,500 near the intersection with U.S. Route 287 and an AADT of 1,000 VPD east of the city limits.
Traffic volumes in this area have changed little over the past six years.

U.S. Route 287 is currently providing a LOS between B and C within the city limits of Townsend
and U.S. Route 12 is providing a LOS between A and B within the city. According to the MDT
forecasts, in the year 2020 U.S. Route 287 will continue to provide a LOS of C within the city limits
of Townsend and U.S. Route 12 will provide a LOS between B and C.

                   2. Current Needs

Currently the roadways in the area are providing an acceptable level of service. Roadway traffic
volumes are relatively light and growth is slow. According to MDT the three-lane section of U.S.
287 within the city limits should provide an acceptable level of service through the year 2020. No
significant traffic congestion problems are anticipated within the City of Townsend in the next 20
years.

                   3. Anticipated Future Improvement

There is a project scheduled for early 2004 to grade and resurface portions of U.S. Route 12 east of
Townsend.

       iv. Meagher County

               a. City of White Sulphur Springs

                   1. Characteristics

The City of White Sulphur Springs is primarily accessed by U.S. Route 12, which enters the
community from the south, turns to the east, and proceeds out of town. White Sulphur Springs has
a variety of other local streets making up a grid pattern within the community. Traffic volumes
within the area are relatively low. Traffic counts within the area indicate U.S. Route 12 has an ADT
volume of 2,100 to 3,300 with the city Route 12. Outside the city limits U.S. Route 12 has an
AADT of 1,100 VPD south of the city and 400 VPD east of the city. Secondary 360, which
proceeds to the west of White Sulphur Springs, has an ADT of 1,100 VPD. Traffic volumes in this
area have changed little over the past six years.

All routes within and around the community of White Sulphur Springs are functioning at LOS B or
higher and should continue to function at that LOS for the next 20 years.

                   2. Current Needs

Currently the roadways in the area are providing an acceptable level of service. Roadway traffic
volumes are relatively light and growth is slow. No significant traffic congestion problems are
anticipated within the City of White Sulphur Springs within the next 20 years.




                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                               INFRASTRUCTURE             Page141

       i. Traffic Issues of Lewis and Clark County

Lewis and Clark County had numerous highways passing through this area. Most of these
roadways intersect near the City of Helena. The largest highway in the county is I-15, which passes
through from north to south. I-15 is a four-lane controlled-access interstate highway. The road
carries an AADT volume 3,000 VPD north of the City of Helena. The roadway is currently running
as a LOS of A throughout the county. The LOS on I-15 is expected to change very little over the
next 20 years except near the City of Helena where it may lower to LOS B.

There are several principal arterial and secondary routes within Lewis and Clark County. These
routes include U.S. Highway 12 (287), MT Secondary 279, MT 200 Secondary 434, MT Secondary
280, MT Secondary 430, MT Secondary 231, MT Secondary 453, and MT Secondary 284. Major
roadways within the county are as follows:

U.S. Highway 12 (287)       Four-lane route at East Helena and west with an LOS of A. AADT
                            volume of 2,900 VPD west of Helena and 6,200 VPD east of East
                            Helena. East of East Helena LOS C to D, which will lower to LOS
                            E by 2020.
MT Secondary 279            Two-lane route; AADT 600 VPD. Mostly LOS B to C. Will lower
                            to LOS C to D by 2020.
MT 200                      Two-lane route. AADT 600 VPD. Mostly LOS B to C. Will lower
                            to LOS C to D by 2020.
MT Secondary 434            Two-lane route. AADT 300 VPD. LOS A to B. Minimal decrease
                            in LOS by 2020.
MT Secondary 280            Two-lane route. AADT 1,200 VPD. Mostly LOS A to B except
                            LOS C near Helena. Minimal decrease in LOS by 202 except LOS
                            D near Helena.
MT Secondary 430            Two-lane route. AADT 1,500 VPD. Mostly LOS B to C except
                            LOS D near Helena. LOS lowers to LOS C to D by d2020.
                            Currently scheduled for reconstruction in 2006.
MT Secondary 231            Two-lane route. AADT 1,600 VPD. Currently LOS B to D
                            changing to LOS C to D by 2020.
MT Secondary 453            Two-lane route. AADT 1,400 VPD. Currently LOS B to C
                            lowering to LOS C to D by 2020.
MT Secondary 284            Two-lane route. AADT 900 VPD. Currently LOS A to B. Minimal
                            decreases in LOS by 2020.
There is one minor arterial route in Lewis and Clark County. U.S. Route 287 is located in the
northern part of Lewis and Clark County and has an AADT volume of 400 VPD. The road is
currently functioning at LOS A to B and should continue to function at this LOS through the year
2020.




                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE               Page 142

                    a. Anticipated Future Improvement

The following is a list of roadway improvements scheduled by MDT to take place in Lewis and
Clark County over the next five years.

                    Custer Avenue, Helena, reconstruction, 2005.
                    Lincoln Road I-15 Interchange 2005.
                    .PMS Overlay east and west of Lincoln, 2005.
                    South Helena I-15 Interchange, 2006.
                    I-15, Dearborn rest area construction, 2009.
                    U.S. 287, Bowmans Corner, Augusta, reconstruction and structure, 2006.
                    South 430, Canyon Ferry Road, Helena, reconstruction and structure, 2006.
                    Mill, overlay, East Helena, 2006.
                    Reconstruct curve Wylie Drive N., East Helena, 2007.

       ii. Traffic Issues of Northern Jefferson County

Jefferson County has seven different sections of interstate, principal arterial and minor arterial
routes. These routes include sections of I-15 and I-90 as well as other Montana Highways. The
major roadways within the county are as follows:

I-90                         Four-lane interstate highway. AADT 7,000 VPD. Current LOS of
                             A. Should remain LOS A through 2020.
I-15                         Four-lane interstate highway. AADT 2,500 VPD. Current LOS of
                             A. Should remain LOS A through 2020.
U.S. Route 287               Two-lane section. AADT 1,300 VPD. Current LOS B to C. Should
                             remain LOS B to C through 2020.
MT Route 69                  Two-lane section. AADT 900 VPD. Current LOS A to B. Will
                             likely lower to LOS B to C by 2020.
MT Route 55                  Two-lane section. AADT 1,600 VPD. Current LOS A to B. Will
                             likely lower to LOS B to C by 2020.
MT Route 2                   Two-lane section. AADT 700 VPD. Current LOS A to B. Should
                             remain LOS A to B through 2020.
MT S-399                     Two-lane section. AADT 300 VPD. Current LOS mostly A to B
                             except LOS C near Boulder. Current LOS should remain through
                             2020.

                 a. Anticipated Future Improvement

The following is a list of roadway improvement scheduled by MDT to take place in Jefferson
County over the next five years.

                    Mill, Overlay, Pipestone to Whitehall, 2005.
                    Reconstruct curve north of Whitehall, 2006.
                    I-15 Boulder rest area construction, 2006.
                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE             Page143

                   Mill, Overlay, junction MT 55-Jct. MT 2, 2007.
                   Reconstruct curve, NE of Whitehall, 2007.
                   South of Boulder, reconstruction and structure, 2009.

       iii. Traffic Issues of Broadwater County

Broadwater County has six different sections of interstate, principal arterial and minor arterial
routes. These routes include a portion of I-90, U.S. Route 287, U.S. Route 12, MT Secondary 284,
MT Secondary 285, and MT Secondary 437. A description of these roads is as follows:

I-90                        Four-lane interstate highway. AADT 7,000 VPD. Current LOS of
                            A. Should remain LOS A through 2020.
U.S. Route 287              Two-lane principal arterial. AADT 2,500 4,300 VPD. Current LOS
                            from A to D. The LOS will likely lower to LOS D to E by 2020.
U.S. Route 12               Two-lane minor arterial. AADT 1,000 VPD. Currently LOS A to B
                            except for a section through the Big Belt Mountains that is LOS C.
                            By the year 2020 the portion of road west of U.S. Route 89 will
                            lower to LOS B to C except for a section through the Big Belt
                            Mountains that will lower to LOS D. The rest of the roadway will
                            remain at LOS A to B.
MT Secondary 284            Two-lane principal arterial. AADT 200 VPD. Current LOS of A.
                            Should remain LOS A through 2020.
MT Secondary 285            Two-lane principal arterial. AADT 300 VPD. Current LOS of A.
                            Should remain LOS A through 2020.
MT S 437                    Two-lane principal arterial. AADT 200 VPD. Current LOS of A.
                            Should remain LOS A through 2020.


                a. Anticipated Future Improvement

The following is a list of roadway improvement scheduled to take place in Broadwater County over
the next five years.

                   U.S. 287 east of Townsend, grade and surface, 2004
                   U.S. 12 south of Toston, passing lane, 2004.
                   U.S. 12, north of Three Forks, passing lane, 2004.
                   U.S. 12 Three Forks Interchange, new turn bays, 2006.

       iv. Traffic Issues of Meagher County

Meagher County has numerous different principal arterial and minor arterial routes. All of these
roads are two-lanes and have relatively low traffic volumes. The major roadways within the county
are as follows:

U.S. Route 12               Minor arterial. AADT 600 VPD. Currently LOS A to B. By the
                            year 2020 the LOS will lower to B to C.
                                                  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                  INFRASTRUCTURE                Page 144



U.S. Route 89                 Minor arterial. AADT 400 – 600 VPD. Currently LOS A to B.
                              Should remain at LOS A to B through 2020.
MT Secondary 294              Principal arterial. AADT 100 VPD. Currently LOS A. Should
                              remain at LOS A through 2020.
MT Secondary 259              Principal arterial. AADT 70 VPD. Currently LOS A to B. Should
                              remain at LOS A to B through 2020.
MT Secondary 360              Principal arterial. AADT 300 VPD. Currently LOS A to B. Should
                              remain at LOS A to B through 2020.

                    a. Anticipated Future Improvements

The following is a list of roadway improvements scheduled to take place in Meagher County over the next
five years.
                    U.S. Route 12, Checkerboard to Martinsdale, reconstruction and structure,
                     2008.
                    U.S. Route 89, Ringling north and south, reconstruction and structure, 2005.
                    N. Fork Musselshell to north of Martinsdale, structures & appurtenances, 2009.


Railroad Access
This section contains a description of the various means of railroad access available within the study
area. Figures 4.13 and 4.14 show individual rail lines traveling through Montana. Table 4.15 gives
a summary of railroad access in the study area.




                                                   Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                            INFRASTRUCTURE             Page145

Figure 4.13




              Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                            INFRASTRUCTURE             Page 146




Figure 4.14


              Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE               Page147

       i. Lewis and Clark County

Lewis and Clark County has service by both Montana Rail Link, Inc. (MRL) and Burlington
Northern SantaFe (BNSF). In addition to the stations at Helena and East Helena, Montana Rail
Link also has a station in Fort Harrison. The frequency of service to each of these locations listed is
once per day, Monday through Friday, by the local train or switch job assigned to service the
location. On the main line going through Helena, there are numerous through trains traveling over
that route each day, but they do not provide service to those points. Through trains operate between
such major points as Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington; Kansas City, Missouri; Memphis,
Tennessee; Minneapolis, Minnesota; and Missoula and Laurel, Montana.

Montana Rail Link has no plans for upgrading the system. They maintain the tracks to certain
standards provided by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). MRL’s main line track-age is
maintained to FRA Class IV standards, which provide for maximum train speeds up to 60 mph.

Burlington Northern SantaFe had rail service between Great Falls and Helena until July 2000. This
rail line was washed out near Ulm and there are no plans to reopen in the future. The traffic from
this railroad has been re-routed through Laurel.

               a. City of East Helena

Montana Rail Link in East Helena provides rail service to the area. Formed in 1987 by assuming
control of Montana’s southern route from Burlington Northern SantaFe, MRL operates in three
states: Montana, Idaho, and Washington. Its main line is a major corridor for rail traffic between
central and southern states and the Pacific Northwest and Canada. MRL headquarters is in
Missoula.

MRL operates 812 route-miles in Montana. Of the 812 miles, 191 miles are owned by MRL and
the remainder is leased. In 1999, 261,011 carloads were moved on MRL representing over 32
million gross tons. Principle commodities included lumber and wood products; petroleum and coal
products; farm products; food and kindred products; stone, clay, glass and concrete products;
chemicals and allied products; coal; miscellaneous mixed shipment; pulp, paper, and allied
products; and transportation equipment. Sixty-nine percent of MRL traffic is bridged; that is, it
simply passes over the line and neither originates or terminates on MRL. A confidential agreement
between BNSF and MRL guarantees a certain amount of BNSF traffic to MRL.

               b. City of Helena

Montana Rail Link and Burlington Northern SantaFe provide rail service in Helena. Montana Rail
Link’s main line travels through Helena and connects with the Burlington Northern SantaFe line.

Burlington Northern SantaFe is the largest railroad in Montana, operating 2,135 route miles within
the state. The entire BNSF system covers the western two-thirds of the United States. BNSF
Headquarters is at Fort Worth, Texas (2000 Montana State Rail Plan Update).

The line to Helena connecting from Great Falls is currently out of service due to riverbank
instability problems near Ulm. There are no customers on the line; all traffic is overhead or bridge
traffic to and from Montana Rail Link in Helena. That traffic is being re-routed through Laurel.

                                                  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 148



               c. Wolf Creek and Craig

There is no longer rail service in the Wolf Creek/Craig area. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail
line that traveled through this area has been closed due to riverbank stability problems near Ulm.

               d. Town of Augusta

There is no rail service in the Augusta area.

               e. Town of Lincoln

There is no rail service in the Lincoln area.

       ii. Northern Jefferson County

Montana Rail Link has station in Louisville, Montana, with service on Sunday through Friday.
MRL also has a line between Northern Jefferson and Lewis and Clark County traveling from East
Helena to Montana City and serves the Ash Grove Cement plan only.

Montana Rail Link maintains the branch line from East Helena to Montana City to FRA Class II
standards specifying a much lower speed of 25 mph, but still very adequate for the requirements of
the line.

               a.   Town of Boulder

There is no rail service in the Boulder area.

       iii. Broadwater County

Montana Rail Link has stations in Winston, Townsend, and Toston, operating Sunday through
Friday. Service to these stations is provided on an as-needed basis, and any train can stop at any of
these stations to meet or pass other trains. MRL has no future plans of upgrading this line but
maintains the track to FRA Class IV standards.

               a. City of Townsend

Townsend has several railroad patrons including a grain elevator and lumber industry, which is
serviced by MRL. If the grain elevator orders cars, MRL will provide the cars and subsequently
stop and pick up the cars as needed, but his does not always require daily service. The lumber
loading operation in Townsend requires daily service Sunday through Friday. Other railroad
patrons in this area are serviced on an as needed basis.

       iv. Meagher County

There is no rail service in Meagher County.


                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                INFRASTRUCTURE              Page149

Table 4.15
Railroad Access Summary

    LOCATION            AVAILABILITY SIDINGS              FREQENCY            FUTURE PLANS

East Helena            Montana Rail Link       Yes       Monday–Friday Maintain above FRA
                                                                       Class IV standards
Helena                 Montana Rail Link       Yes       Monday–Friday Maintain above FRA
                                                                       Class IV standards
Townsend               Montana Rail Link       Yes       Sunday–Friday Maintain above FRA
                                                                       Class IV standards
Boulder                None                    N/A           N/A       N/A
Augusta                None                    N/A             N/A         N/A
White Sulphur Springs None                     N/A             N/A         N/A
Lincoln                None                    N/A             N/A         N/A
Craig                  Burlington Northern Closed         Closed           No plans to reopen
                       Santa Fe
Wolf Creek             Burlington Northern Closed         Closed           No plans to reopen
                       Santa Fe
Lewis and Clark        Montana Rail Link MRL: Fort MRL: Monday—            MRL: Maintain above
County                 Burlington Northern Harrison,      Friday           FRA Class IV standards
                       Santa Fe             Helena,    BNSF: Closed        BNSF: No plans to
                                             East                          reopen
                                            Helena
                                            BNSF:
                                            Closed
Northern Jefferson     Montana Rail Link Montana       Montana City:       Maintain above FRA
County                                       City,         daily           Class II standards
                                           Louisville   Louisville:
                                                      Sunday—Friday
Broadwater County      Montana Rail Link Winston, Sunday—Friday            Maintain above FRA
                                          Townsend,                        Class IV standards
                                            Toston
Meagher County         None                  N/A           N/A             N/A




Airport Systems

This section contains a description of the types, characteristics, current use, and capacity of the
airports in the research area. These airports are described in a manner relevant to the improvements
necessary for economic growth in the area. Airports discussed include the Helena, Townsend,
White Sulphur Springs, Lincoln, Augusta, Benchmark, Boulder, Canyon Ferry, and Mountain
Lakes. The Fort Harrison Airport is excluded from this discussion, as all operations are military.

                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                       INFRASTRUCTURE           Page 150

             i. Airport Types and Characteristics

  Airport inventory table 4.16 details the name, classification, airport capacity and maximum size of
  airplane, navigational aids, instrument approach facilities, and fuel availability at each of the
  aforementioned airports follows. Table data was gathered from the Montana State Aviation System
  Plan Update 1998 – 1999, the Montana Aeronautics Division’s most current planning document.

Table 4.16
Airport Inventory

                                                MAX SIZE                    INSTRUMENT
                PUBLIC                 AIRPORT       OF     NAVIGATIONAL APPROACH               FUEL
CITY           AIRPORT CLASSIFICAITON CAPACITY PLANES              AIDS      FACILITIES AVAILABILITY
HELENA         Helena   Primary       20 Year   *Primary *** Rotating       ***RWY 27- 80, 100, 100LL,
               Regional Commercial    Projected Commercial Airway Beacon, ILS,***A-       Jet A
                                      Airport   Service; C- VORTAC,         VOR, ***B-
                                      Demand Is III B727- Rotating Airport VOR/DME or
                                      Under     200         Beacon, NDB,    GPS, ***C-
                                      Current               Remote          LOC/DME BC-
                                      Capacity              Communications (back course),
                                                            Outlet, Lighted ***D-NDB or
                                                            Obstructions,   GPS



EAST           None      N/A              N/A        N/A         N/A             N/A        N/A
HELENA
TOWNSEND Townsend General Aviation        20 Year   * B-I,G.A.; Rotating Airport None       Planned for 2004
         Airport  10,000 or fewer         Projected <12,500# Beacon (Dawn to
                  annual operations       Airport               Dusk)
                                          Demand Is
                                          Under
                                          Current
                                          Capacity

WHITE          White     General Aviation, 20 Year   * B-I, G.   Rotating Airport None      100LL
SULPHUR        Sulphur   10,000 or Fewer   Projected A.; <12,500 Beacon (Dawn to
SPRINGS        Springs   Annual Operations Airport   #           Dusk)
               Airport                     Demand Is
                                           Under
                                           Current
                                           Capacity

WOLF           None      N/A              N/A        N/A         N/A             N/A        N/A
CREEK
LINCOLN        Lincoln   General Aviation 20 Year    * B-I,      Rotating Airport None      None
               Airport   10,000 or Fewer   Projected G.A.;       Beacon (Dawn to
                         Annual Operations Airport   <12,500 #   Dusk)
                                           Demand Is
                                           Under
                                           Current
                                           Capacity

CRAIG          None      N/A              N/A        N/A         N/A             N/A        N/A

                                                       Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                         INFRASTRUCTURE          Page151

AUGUSTA      **Augusta Turf General         20 Year   * A-1, Turf None          None          None
             Airport   Aviation 10,000 or   Projected G.A.
                       Fewer Annual         Airport
                       Operations           Demand Is
                                            Under
                                            Current
                                            Capacity



           ii. Current Use of Regional Airports

 Within the research area, Helena Regional Airport is the only ―primary commercial service‖ airport.
 This airport services scheduled passengers, cargo/charter, military, itinerant general aviation, and
 local general aviation. Helena Regional Airport accommodates the majority of shipping and
 passenger demands within Lewis and Clark, Broadwater, Meagher, and Northern Jefferson
 Counties. The southern portions of Jefferson, Meagher, and Broadwater Counties route a portion of
 the shipping and passenger activity through Gallatin Field in Bozeman and Bert Mooney Airport in
 Butte.

 All other airports in the Helena region are classified as general aviation airports and support fewer
 than 10,000 annual operations. The airports of Townsend, White Sulphur Springs, and Lincoln are
 paved runway general aviation airports while the airports of Augusta, Benchmark, Boulder, Canyon
 Ferry, and Mountain Lakes function on turf or gravel runways. All of these general aviation
 airports support a combination of recreational, governmental, light business, and crop dusting
 operations. The airports of Augusta, Lincoln, Townsend, and White Sulphur Springs facilitate a
 combination of air cargo, military, and general aviation operations; however, the majority of
 operations in the region are classified as general aviation. General aviation includes all operations
 of civil aircraft excluding air carrier, charter, and military operations. The ―1998 – 1999 Montana
 State Aviation System Plan‖ details the current and forecasted operations of all airports in the
 research area. Figure 4.18 shows the locations and classifications of all airports in the State of
 Montana. Table 4.17 shows that 62.4 percent of the current airport operations in the region are
 classified as general aviation. The included State Aviation System Map show the airports of
 Helena, Lincoln, White Sulphur Springs, Benchmark, and Townsend are included in the National
 Plan Integrated Airport System (NPIAS). This classification is given to airports eligible for State
 and Federal funding.

 Table 4.17
 Airport Inventory

 CITY          PUBLIC  CLASS                  AIR PORT          MAX SIZE OF NAV. AIDS INST.          FUEL
               AIRPORT                        CAPACITY          PLANES                APPROACH       AVA.
                                                                                      FACILITIES


 Boulder       **Boulder Turf General       20 Year Projected   * A-1, Turf   None     None          None
               Airport   Aviation 10,000 or Airport Demand Is   G.A.
                         Fewer Annual       Under Current
                         Operations         Capacity




                                                        Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                                            INFRASTRUCTURE            Page 152

Canyon Ferry **Canyon             Turf General       20 Year Projected            * A-1, Turf        None      None     2005
             Ferry                Aviation 10,000 or Airport Demand Is            G.A.
             Airport              Fewer Annual       Under Current
                                  Operations         Capacity

Mountain           Mountain       Turf General       20 Year Projected            * A-1, Turf        None      None     None
Lakes              Lakes          Aviation 10,000 or Airport Demand Is            G.A.
                   Airport        Fewer Annual       Under Current
                                  Operations         Capacity

Benchmark          Benchmark Turf General       20 Year Projected                 * A-1, Turf        None      None     None
                   Airport   Aviation 10,000 or Airport Demand Is                 G.A.
                             Fewer Annual       Under Current
                             Operations         Capacity


*---Approach Speed Category

                             Approach Speed                                Wing Span Design Groups

                         A        <91 kts                                              I             <49 ft
         91 kts<         B        <121 kts                       49 ft <              II             <79 ft
        121 kts<         C        <141 kts                       79 ft <              III            <118 ft
        141 kts<         D        <166 kts                      118 ft <              IV             <171 ft
        166 kts<         E                                      171 ft <              V              <214 ft
                                                                214 ft <              VI
***---Instrument Approach Facility Abbreviations
RWY                Runway
ILS                Instrument Landing System
A-VOR              Very High Frequency Omidirectional Radio Beacon
B-VOR/DME          Very High Frequency Omidirectional Radio Beacon
GPS                Global Positioning System
C-LOC/DME          Localizer/ Distance Measurement Equipment
D-NDB              Non Directional Radio




                                                                     Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                            INFRASTRUCTURE             Page153


Figure 4.18




              Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE             Page 154

iii.   Current Demand and Capacity of Regional Airports

The 1998–1999 Montana State Aviation System Plan indicates a slow growth rate for the Montana
aviation system over the next 20 years. Within in this 20-year period the system plan indicates no
capacity concerns for the Helena region airports other than a potential need for longer and upgraded
runways at many smaller airports to facilitate an increase in activity of higher approach speed
business and air ambulance aircraft. A transition from large, high-capacity jets to regional jets
carrying 30–70 passengers may double or triple the air carrier operations at Helena Regional
Airport. An increase in overnight inventory, express mail, and e-business shipment, could also
double or triple the cargo activity at Helena Regional Airport.

       iv. Current Needs of the Helena Region Airports

To facilitate the expected population and economic growth in the Helena area over the next 20
years, the regional aviation system needs only to maintain current practices, proactively support the
growth of recreational and personal business aviation, and upgrade the aviation infrastructure at the
smaller regional airports as growth occurs. Other statewide aviation system recommendations are
discussed in the 1998-99 State Aviation System Plan and cover the areas of grants and funding,
education, navigational systems, and safety. The system plan emphasizes proactively pursuing the
available state and federal monies for National Plan Integrated Airport System (NPIAS) airports.
All the airports in the region are eligible for state grant and loan services, and the paved runway
general aviation airports as part of the Federal Airport System are eligible for competitive airport
grants. The Helena Regional Airport and general aviation airports in the NPIAS are eligible for
federal grants.


Internet Service Available
This section contains a description on Internet service available within the study area.

       i. Internet Service Available

There are two basic Internet service types available in this area: dial up and broadband services.
Dial up service requires dialing, through a telephone modem, to an Internet service provider. This
will allow a connection to a variety of Internet providers. All areas with telephone capability have
access to this method. Broadband service includes wireless communication, Digital Subscriber
Line (DSL), and cable service. Wireless service is restricted to businesses that have the capability
to have visual contact from antenna to antenna, while DSL and cable service is designed for both
residential and business use.

DSL is a method for moving data over regular phone lines. A DSL circuit is much faster than a
regular phone connection, and the wires coming into the subscriber’s premises are the same wires
used for regular phone service. A DSL circuit must be configured to connect two specific locations,
similar to a leased line (however a DSL circuit is not a leased line). The highest speed data
connections require a leased line. A common configuration of DSL allows downloads at speeds of
up to 1.544 megabits (not megabytes) per second, and uploads at speeds of 128 kilobits per second.
This arrangement is called Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL). Another common
configuration is Symmetrical Digital Subscriber Line, a version of DSL where the upload speeds
and download speeds are the same (http://www.meshdsl.net).
                                                  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                   INFRASTRUCTURE               Page155


A leased line refers to lines such as a telephone line or fiber-optic cable that is rented for exclusive
24-hour, 7-days-a-week use from your location to another location. T-1 is a leased line capable of
carrying data at 1,544,000 bits-per-second. At maximum theoretical capacity, a T-1 line could
move a megabyte in less than ten seconds. That is still not fast enough for full-screen, full-motion
video, for which you need at least 10,000,000 bits-per-second. T-1 lines are commonly used to
connect large local area networks to the Internet. This service is not widely used due to the large
monthly fee and expensive equipment required (http://www.mesdsl.net).

Cable modems are designed for residential use. Through a cable modem service, users compete for
bandwidth with neighbors because the service is over a shared line. Cable Internet service is
provided through AT&T Broadband Internet Service. This service is connected through your cable
wire, which does not disrupt the phone or fax line and has a ready-to-go connection with no logging
on or dial-up needed (http://meshdsl.net). AT&T does not provide cable service to Wolf Creek,
Craig, Augusta, Lincoln, Boulder, or White Sulphur Springs and there are no future plans to do so at
this time.

Wireless Internet communication requires visual contact from antenna to antenna and is only
available in the Helena area at this time.

Table 4.19 lists the Internet services and providers available for the specific locations.

Table 4.19     Internet Service Available

                                                    Internet Providers
Location           Internet Service*
                                                AT&T, Global Net, Helenet, InfoMine, MCN,
East Helena        Dial up, Cable, DSL          Montana Internet Corporation, More Wire Inc.,
                                                Multiband Communications, OneMain.com,
                                                OneWest.net, and Qwest Internet Services
                                                AT&T, Global Net, Helenet, InfoMine, MCN,
Helena             Dial up, Cable, Wireless,    Montana Internet Corporation, More Wire Inc.,
                   DSL                          Multiband Communications, OneMain.com,
                                                OneWest.net, Qwest Internet Services


                                                Qwest
Wolf Creek         Dial up
                                                Qwest
Craig              Dial up
                                                3 Rivers Communications
Augusta            Dial up
                                                Lincoln Telephone
Lincoln            Dial up
                                                Qwest
Boulder            Dial up
                                                AT&T, Qwest, Montana Internet
Townsend           Dial up, Cable, Wireless

                                                   Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                      INFRASTRUCTURE             Page 156

                                                      Montana In Touch, subsidiary of Triangle
White Sulphur             Dial up                     Telephone Cooperative/Central Montana
Springs                                               Communications
                                                      AT&T, Global Net, Helenet, InfoMine, MCN,
Lewis and                 Dial up, Cable, Wireless,   Montana Internet Corporation, More Wire Inc.,
Clark County              DSL                         Multiband Communications, OneMain.com,
                                                      OneWest.net, Qwest Internet Services, and 3
                                                      Rivers Communications
                                                      Qwest
Northern                  Dial up
Jefferson
County
                                                      Qwest, Montana Internet
Broadwater                Dial up
County
                                                      Qwest
Meagher                   Dial up
County
* Montana Internet Corporation-2002
Other Internet providers that service these locations include AMEX Online, AOL, Bluelight, Juno,
Net Zero and NetZero Platinum. These providers can be accessed instead of using the local Internet
provider available for the area.


Public Transportation
This section contains a description of the various means of public transportation available within the
study area.

             i.     Lewis and Clark County Public Transportation

Along with the public transportation available in Helena, East Helena, Lincoln, Wolf Creek, and
Augusta, Rimrock Trailways and Capitol Taxi provide transportation service to parts of Lewis and
Clark County. Rimrock Trailways, a regional bus service, makes two trips daily from Great Falls to
Butte on Highway Interstate 15 and will make an unscheduled drop off or pick up along this route.
This bus service also travels from Great Falls to Missoula on Highway 200 and will also make an
unscheduled drop off or pick up along this route. Capitol Taxi is a taxi service based in Helena and
will provide transportation service within a 50-mile radius of Helena.

According to the Public Works Department in Helena, the only future planning of public
transportation in Lewis and Clark County is focused on the greater Helena area.

                     a. City of East Helena

According to the Montana Rural Passenger Needs Study, public transportation for the East Helena
area is provided by the East Helena Senior Center. Capital Taxi and Rimrock Trailways also
provide transportation service for the East Helena area. Rimrock Trailways is a regional bus line
that travels through the City of East Helena. While the city is not a scheduled stop, the bus travels

                                                        Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                               INFRASTRUCTURE              Page157

through the area once a day and will provide any unscheduled drop off or pick up. Capitol Taxi is
based in the City of Helena but provides service to the East Helena area as well.

Rimrock Trailways is a Billings based company providing a variety of transit services, airport
transfers, and charter services throughout Montana. Rimrock operates two scheduled busses
through Helena each day, one eastbound and one westbound. These buses travel through Helena
and connect to Bozeman, Billings and Missoula. Rimrock also provides daily bus service between
Helena and Great Falls. The East-West buses provide connections in Billings and Missoula to the
Greyhound Bus that provides transit service to most locations throughout the country (The Greater
Helena Area 2001 Transportation Development Update, 2001). Figure 4.20 shows the Rimrock
Trailways bus route throughout Montana.

Capitol Taxi is a private business that began serving the Helena area in 1982. Capitol Taxi is
currently the only taxi service in the Helena area and provides door-to-door service on demand, 24
hours a day, 365 days a year.




                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                            INFRASTRUCTURE             Page 158

Figure 4.20




              Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                   INFRASTRUCTURE               Page159

               b. City of Helena

There are a variety of different transportation providers operating within the Helena area. These
providers include public, private and non-profit operations. Most of these organizations serve a
specific segment of Helena’s population (The Greater Helena Area 2001 Transportation
Development Update, 2001).

According to the Montana Rural Passenger Needs Study, public transportation for the Helena area
are provided a variety of services including Big Sky Care Center, Citizens Advocate Office, Cooney
Convalescent Home, Department of Corrections, Developmental Disabilities Planning, Downtown
Trolley, Family Outreach Inc., G and L Transit Inc., Helena Dial-a-Ride, Helena Industries, Indian
Alliance-Elderly Center, Neighborhood Center, Rocky Mountain Care Center, Rocky Mountain
Development Council, Silver Linings Inc., Spring Meadow Resources, St. Peters Hospital-TCU,
and Westmont. Rimrock Trailways and Capitol Taxi also provide transportation services for the
area. Rimrock Trailways has two scheduled stops for drop-off and pick-up in Helena daily.

The City of Helena has been operating the Dial-a-Ride bus service within the city limits since 1979.
This service provides both a door-to-door service and a fixed route service and is available to the
general public (The Greater Helena Area 2001 Transportation Development Update, 2001).

The Downtown Trolley was established in May 2001, operated by Helena Dial-a-ride for the
Downtown Helena area. The trolley system was designed to circulate through Downtown Helena,
providing an alternative mode of transportation for people traveling in the area. The trolley
operates six days a week on a 20-minute cycle and serves the area between the Helena walking mall
and the Great Northern Town Center (The Greater Helena Area 2001 Transportation Development
Update, 2001).

Spring Meadow Resources is a non-profit organization providing services to adults with mental
deficiencies. The service was originated in 1974. Spring Meadow has numerous group homes in
the Helena area and provides transportation to its clients involving daily trips to the Spring Meadow
Resources Day Center and Helena Industries. The service is also used to take clients to shopping
centers, medical offices, banks, and restaurants.

The Montana Department of Transportation Employee Vanpool has three vans that are used in an
employee vanpooling program. The program was started in 1978 and operates on three routes,
which include Helena, the Helena Valley, and East Helena.

Rocky Mountain Development Council (RMDC) is a public agency serving a variety of clients and
has been providing transportation services for their senior program participants since 1986. RMDC
operated five days a week and the buses pick up their clients at their homes and take them to and
from tier program functions within the city limits.

G & L Transit is a charter bus company based in Helena and Butte. The service provides
transportation for tour charters, the U.S. Military, airlines, and hospitals. The service is available 24
hours a day, seven days a week and coordinates with Dial-A-Ride and RMDC to meet the needs of
the clients.



                                                  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                               INFRASTRUCTURE              Page 160

The Great Helena area 2001 Transportation Development Plan Update was developed to examine
existing transit serves being provided in the Greater Helena Area and make recommendations for
the future. The document lists the following recommendations for the future of transportation in the
Helena area:
         Continue to provide the Downtown Trolley service and expand its service to year-round
            availability;
         Purchase another checkpoint route bus so the route operates with two buses running
             along the route in opposite directions;
                    Provide transit service between Helena and East Helena;
         Provide transit service along Montana Avenue to Lincoln Road and work with MDT and
            the county to provide park-and-ride lots along the route;
                    Upgrade the Dial-A-Ride office building to include a passenger waiting area;
                    Construct a new bus garage sized to accommodate four transit buses;
                    Improve the marketing of the Dial-A-Ride system; and
         Implement appropriate Transportation Development Plan (TDP) measures that will help
             increase transit use in the community.

The Greater Helena Area 2001 Transportation Development Plan Update is at present in the draft
stage and being reviewed by appropriate personnel. The above recommendations have not yet been
approved.

              c. Town of Wolf Creek

Public Transportation in the Wolf Creek area is provided by the Dearborn Senior Center according
the Montana Rural Passenger Needs Study. Rimrock Trailways travels through the area and while
the town is not a scheduled stop, the bus will make an unscheduled drop-off or pick-up. Capitol
Taxi is based in Helena and will provide taxi service to Wolf Creek.

              d. Town of Craig

Rimrock Trailways and Capitol Taxi provide the only public transportation in Craig. Rimrock
Trailways travels through the area two times daily and while Craig is not a scheduled stop, the bus
will make an unscheduled drop-off or pick-up. Capitol Taxi is based in Helena but will provide
transportation to Craig.

              e. Town of Augusta

The only public transportation available for the Augusta area according to the Montana Rural
Passenger Needs Study is provided by the Augusta Senior Center. There is no bus or taxi service
available for the Town of Augusta.

              f.   Town of Lincoln

According to the Montana Rural Passenger Needs Study, public transportation in Lincoln is
provided by the Lincoln Senior Center. Rimrock Trailways travels through the Town of Lincoln
once a day and while the town is not a scheduled stop, the bus will make an unscheduled drop-off or
pick-up. Capitol Taxi is based in Helena but will provide taxi service to Lincoln.

                                                Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE              Page161

       ii. Northern Jefferson County Public Transportation

Along with the public transportation available in Boulder, the Evergreen Clancy Health and Rehab
Center provides public transportation service for the Clancy area. Rimrock Trailways, Capitol Taxi,
and City Taxi provide transportation service to parts of Northern Jefferson County. Rimrock
Trailways, a regional bus service, makes two trips daily from Great Falls to Butte on Interstate
Highway 15 and will make an unscheduled drop off or pick up along this route. Capitol Taxi is a
taxi service based in Helena and will provide transportation service within a 50-mile radius of
Helena. City Taxi is a taxi service based in Butte and will provide service within a 50-mile radius
of Butte.

According the Jefferson County Commissioners, there are no future plans to improve the public
transportation in this county. However, the commissioners stated a need for a public transportation
system route that includes Boulder, Montana City, Helena, and East Helena. The Greater Helena
Area 2001 Transportation Development Plan Update recommends carpooling coordinating service
for resident of Northern Jefferson County.

               a. Town of Boulder

Public transportation in the Boulder area is provided by the Boulder-Basin Senior Center and
Montana Developmental Center according to the Montana Rural Passenger Needs Study. Rimrock
Trailways, Capitol Taxi, and City Taxi also provide transportation services in this area. Rimrock
Trailways has two scheduled stops in this area daily.

       iii. Broadwater County Public Transportation

Along with the public transportation available in Townsend, Rimrock Trailways and Capitol Taxi
provide transportation service to parts of Broadwater County. Rimrock Trailways, a regional bus
service, travels daily on Highway 12 and will make an unscheduled drop-off or pick-up along this
route. Capitol Taxi is a taxi service based in Helena and will provide transportation service within a
50-mile radius of Helena. According the Broadwater County Commissioners, there are no plans to
improve the public transportation in this county.

               a. City of Townsend

Public transportation services for the City of Townsend include Broadwater Health Center and the
Senior Citizens Dinner Club according to the Montana Rural Passenger Needs Study provided by
MDT. Capitol Taxi, based in Helena provides transportation service for the Townsend area.
Rimrock Trailways, a regional bus service does not have a scheduled stop for the City Townsend.
However, the bus travels through the area daily and will provide unscheduled drop-off or pick-up.

       iv. Meagher County Public Transportation

The only public transportation available in Meagher County is in White Sulphur Springs.




                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                  INFRASTRUCTURE               Page 162

               a. City of White Sulphur Springs

The Montana Rural Passenger Needs Study lists two means of public transportation for White
Sulphur Springs. The Meagher County Senior Center and the Mountain View medical Center
provide some transportation in the area. A company started in 2004, Lewis and Clark
Transportation, provides weekly bus service to Helena and Great Falls.


Health Care
Broadwater County

The Broadwater Health Center has 44 beds, a critical care center and offers obstetric care. It
provides physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy and respiratory therapy. There are
ambulance services, a diagnostic laboratory a radiology department and 9 acute care beds. BHC
also operates a home health program and the BHC Nursing Home.

There are two doctors in Townsend, one chiropractor and one dentist. In June 2004 there was a
community resource assessment in Townsend. At the meeting concerning health care, residents
expressed a need for an urgent care facility and a pediatrician. There is an effort to recruit another
doctor, but with no success as yet. The hospital has an emergency room, but there are no general
medical facilities open on weekends. The doctors are on call for the emergency room, but it is not
otherwise staffed. There is a medical clinic, operated by the two doctors and a nurse practitioner
that has limited hours.

There are two hospice providers that serve Broadwater County, Intrepid and Hospice of St. Peter’s.
Both of these are based in Helena. There are two full time R.N.’s and a part-time R.N. providing
hospice care.

There are visiting physical therapists, one from Intrepid and one from Homelink. A speech
therapist visits as well, supplied through Intrepid.

Vaccinations are available through the County Health Office. There is one R.N. County Health
Nurse.


Lewis and Clark County

St. Peter’s Hospital, profiled in the Business Profiles section, serves as a hub for regional health
care encompassing all the surrounding counties: Broadwater, Meagher, Jefferson, Powell and
Granite. There are physicians and facilities available in Helena in every medical specialty.

The City-County Health Department operates The Cooperative Health Center. This is a community
health center for people who need basic medical care - including people with limited income and/or
insufficient health insurance. A team of doctors, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants offers
physical exams, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up for basic health care needs.



                                                  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                 INFRASTRUCTURE               Page163

The Cooperative Health Center’s Medication Assistance Program, available to patients, provides
reduced-cost medications to patients with no prescription drug coverage. The Center offers access
to short term mental health therapy. It also provides free breast and cervical health screening for
women age 50 and over.

The Cooperative Health Center operates a limited dental clinic. Available services include dental
screening, cleaning, basic dental services and extractions.

The Parker Medical Center in Lincoln is operated by the Cooperative Health Center, Inc. The
Parker Medical Center offers health care for illnesses and injuries, physical exams, and
immunizations for all age groups. The Center’s services are available to all Ovando, Helmville, and
Lincoln residents regardless of their ability to pay. There is one Physician’s Assistant at the Parker
Medical Center.

Meagher County

The Mountainview Medical Center in White Sulphur Springs has been involved in a $2.6 million
expansion and upgrade over the past 18 months. It is licensed for 6 beds including 2 I.C. Units.
There are two M.D.’s, one of whom is a pediatrician. There is an associated 31 bed nursing home
and a home health agency. The Center provides emergency room coverage 24/7. The expansion
has doubled the ER capability and more than doubled the lab, outpatient and physical therapy
capacity. The hospital has a visiting gastroenterologist. There is also a mental health social worker.
The hospital does no surgery and provides no obstetric services.

The Center is a teaching hospital, with residents receiving training through the WAMI program at
MSU. It is a satellite site for nursing education. It is a teaching site for the University of Great
Falls’ medical coding program. It is also a certified diabetes teaching site.

A dentist visits White Sulphur Springs once or twice per week. There is no ophthamology or
optometry service in Meagher County.


Housing
Broadwater County

Inquiries have produced no county information about housing needs in Broadwater County.

Lewis and Clark County

New homes in Lewis and Clark County in 2003 numbered 330. These had an average price of
$117,400. This reflects an upward trend in new home construction of 3.2% per year. This outstrips
the average population increase of 2% per year.

None of the real estate or housing agency sources contacted for this CEDS had any information on
the demand for housing in the middle and upper price ranges.



                                                 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                                         INFRASTRUCTURE      Page 164


             HOUSING STARTS IN LEWIS AND CLARK
                    COUNTY 1992 to 2003
     300
     250
     200
     150
     100
      50
       0
            1992

                   1993

                          1994

                                 1995

                                        1996

                                               1997

                                                      1998

                                                             1999

                                                                    2000

                                                                           2001

                                                                                  2002

                                                                                         2003
                                                                     Housing Starts

                                                                     Linear (Housing
                                                                     Starts)


In 1999 the Helena Area Housing Task Force adopted the Greater Helena Area Housing Plan. This
plan resulted from the Task Force’s efforts and a survey by Dodge Data. The Task Force and the
survey addressed only low income/affordable housing. The Task Force report states that the
waiting list for section 8 housing fluctuates between 450 and 650 applicants. 84.8% of survey
respondents indicated a need for affordable rental housing. 82% of the homeless people in the area
are single and need one-bedroom residences.

Meagher County

In summer 2004, Meagher County completed a survey of housing needs. The survey had a 40%
response rate, or 125 out of 316 surveys mailed. 98% of respondents live in single family
residences. 69% were over 70 years old, but 86% said they did not need assisted living care and
98% do not have mobility problems. 64% were low to moderate income. While the majority of
respondents do not need assisted living or senior housing, there are still some people, 17, who do
need assisted living. 22 people do have mobility problems. There is currently no assisted living
housing in Meagher County, so there is a need among those who responded that they need
assistance and have problems with mobility. Also, 76 people said they would live in senior housing
if it were available.


Educational Institutions

Montana’s public school funding is based on a formula that relies upon school enrollments.
According to the Montana Office of Public Instruction, ―The rising costs of health insurance are
making it increasingly difficult for districts to meet their budgets and not cut essential school district
operations, including classroom programs.‖ Added to inflationary increases is the need to provide
new technologies, and the ever-present labor requirements of administrators and teachers. School
                                                                    Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                                            INFRASTRUCTURE                        Page165

officials and legislative representatives are looking for new mechanisms to fund rising costs. The
Office of Public Instruction intends to continue providing quality education for Montana’s youth
recognizing that this is directly tied to building a healthy competitive economy.

District Judge Jeffrey Sherlock recently ruled that the state of Montana has not provided quality
education at the k-12 level as mandated by the state constitution. He ordered that the state remedy
this shortfall. This ruling could require several hundred million dollars in additional state funding
to schools. At first, immediately following the ruling, the state administration decided to appeal to
the State Supreme Court. Then, the administration decided not to appeal. Most recently, the
administration reversed itself and decided to appeal again. The state legislature will be meeting
beginning in January 2005 and will be considering the school funding order depending on its status
in the courts.

If there is to be more state funding for education, there will be more money flowing through the
public school system and creating economic activity in the education sector within the 2005 and
thereafter time period. There are only two sources for this funding: raising taxes and cutting non-
educational government programs. Raising taxes will shift economic activity from businesses and
individuals to the education sector. Urban areas with large numbers of schools and teachers will
benefit from increased school funding. At the same time, urban areas are where business activity
and individuals are concentrated, so these sectors will contract accordingly. Cutting non-
educational government programs will lessen government-related employment, particularly in those
departments that have the highest portions of the state budget, such as health and human services.
This will affect a city such as Helena that has many government employees. Yet, many of the
health and human services employees are in rural areas with needs for government programs that
address poverty. The last legislature made expenditure cuts that resulted in consolidation of health
and human service programs into the Helena area and left some rural towns bereft of the
employment in that sector and of the services.

Table 2.28 itemizes the number of elementary and secondary schools operating within the four-
county area. It also denotes that within the area, there are two post-secondary institutions located in
Helena. Both the University of Montana-Helena College of Technology and Carroll College
provide educational opportunities for local and regional students.


 Table 2.28
 Number of Educational Institutions
                                                                                                                     Colleges/
                                                                                                                     University   * Home
 County                   PK-K      K-6    1-3     K-5     4-6    6-8     7-8    K-8      1-8     9-12     Private    System      School

 Broadwater                          1                                     1                       1                                27

 Jefferson                           4              1              1       3      1                2                                71

 Lewis & Clark                       5             13              3       2      1                4          7          2         165

 Meagher                                                                   1      3                1                                18

 * Total enrollment, K-12.
 Source: MT Office of Public Instruction, Directory of Montana Schools, 2001-2002 (www.opi.state.mt.us).




                                                                       Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                  INFRASTRUCTURE             Page 166

The 2003 enrollment in public K-12 schools is:

                       County               K-8         9 to 12   Total K-12
                       Broadwater           512         233       745
                       Jefferson            1,250       472       1,722
                       Lewis and Clark      6,303       3,223     9,526
                       Meagher              208         78        286

              County              Total K-12 Private         Total K-12 Home school
              Broadwater          0                          19
              Jefferson           0                          65
              Lewis and Clark     331                        217
              Meagher             0                          13


The UM-Helena College of Technology offers primarily two year programs and has an
approximate enrollment of 950 students. The College plays a significant role contributing to the
Helena economy with a workforce of 120 employees. It returns an estimated $10.9 million to the
local economy on a state investment of $2.6 million. The College is expanding its programs and its
space. It has adopted a strategy of providing directed training for corporate needs, and programs in
technical fields, such as nursing, aviation and electronics. This is a direct link to supplying a
workforce that will foster business development. It is a conscious strategy of the UM-Helena COT
to partner with business, develop custom learning courses and expand internship opportunities.
Recently there was a $100,000 Federal appropriation to expand the composite manufacturing and
aviation program. This will provide trained employees for Summit Aeronautics Group, a Helena
aerospace contractor.

In addition, the college is placing auxiliary programs in communities in Broadwater, Jefferson,
Granite and Gallatin Counties, raising the skill levels in those communities which, in turn, will lead
to local rural business development. Estimated in-state annual tuition is $2,620. The college has a
partnership, the Helena Business Program, with Montana Tech which offers a four-year bachelor’s
degree. The College’s workforce training capacity has been cited as a main reason for business
relocation to this region.

Carroll College is a Catholic, coeducational, liberal arts college located in Helena, Montana. It
offers programs in business, accounting, economics, engineering, public administration,
environmental studies, forensics and nursing. There is also a wide array of quality liberal arts
programs.

Enrollment for 2003/4 is 1,410. The male/female ratio is 39%/61%. Tuition is $14,466 per year.
Room and Board is $5,810, and average book expense is $600. 68% of students are from Montana
and 32% are from out of state. There are 30 international students who represent 10 countries.
Residence hall rooms are wired to network and internet. There are six computer labs on campus.

U.S. News and World Report has ranked Carroll as the fourth best comprehensive college -
bachelor’s in the West, according to its rankings of the best colleges of 2003.


                                                    Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                                                                        INFRASTRUCTURE                                Page167

In November 2001, Carroll was awarded the ABET Innovation Award for its programs in civil
engineering and in mathematics. ABET stands for the Accreditation Board for Engineering and
Technology, which is the national organization that accredits all engineering programs. Carroll's
civil engineering program was accredited.

Carroll has a number of pre-professional programs:

Pre-Medical
Pre-Dental
Pre-Law
Pre-Optometry
Pre-Pharmacy
Pre-Veterinary

Career Training Institute, a private, non-profit organization in existence since 1983, administers
several employment/training programs sponsored by or established through, Housing and Urban
Development, TANF, WORC and FSET (food stamp), the Workforce Investment Act, and the State
Displaced Homemaker program. It also offers professional development classes in general
workplace and interpersonal skills, and computer-based learning in operating software programs. It
has a Business Information Center that has computer workstations, business counseling, and
business formation and operating information resources. There is a Business Resource Center
which offers classes from professionals in marketing, planning, finance, government procurement
and Quickbooks Pro.


Taxes
Property Tax Levies

                                                            Jefferson County             Lewis & Clark County
                Broadwater Co. City of Townsend Three Forks MT City Area City of Boulder Helena Valley City of Helena City of E. Helena Meagher Co. White Sulphur Springs
County Levies            204.00            186.07      204          109.50         94.93        162.47         138.85           138.85       138.23              110.60
City Levies                                 92.34                                 151.69                       114.71             85.76                          119.39
Education Levy           292.09            292.09   306.08          379.29        376.14        404.68         404.68           429.10       300.03              300.03
Total Levies             496.09            570.50   510.08          488.79        622.76        567.15         658.24           653.71       438.26              530.02
Taxable Value       $9,356,091       $1,495,156              $18,196,508       $737,512 $85,316,967 $42,264,890            $2,222,356 $7,290,362              $843,576
Value of 1 Mill      $9,356.09         $1,495.16               $18,196.51       $737.51 $85,316.97 $42,264.89               $2,222.36 $7,290.36                $843.58


Bonding Capacity

The Montana Code Annotated 2003 provides for the computation of all counties’ capacity to issue
bonds.

           “7-7-2101. Limitation on amount of county indebtedness. (1) A county may not issue
           bonds or incur other indebtedness for any purpose in an amount, including existing
           indebtedness, that in the aggregate exceeds 1.4% of the total assessed value of taxable
           property, determined as provided in 15-8-111, within the county, as ascertained by the last
           assessment for state and county taxes.‖ MCA 2003


                                                                               Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
                                                    INFRASTRUCTURE             Page 168


Values as of 2004 Broadwater    Jefferson         Lewis and Clark     Meagher
Assessed Value    229,492,704   588,847,860       2,301,406,693       221,489,822
Bonding           3,212,898     8,243,870         32,219,694          3,100,858
Capacity




                                      Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004
Capacity




                                        Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2004

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: Townsend Montana Real Estate document sample