10. Resolution 4310 - Scenic BywaysAgenda -December 30, 1996
AGENDA ITEM 8 -Request to Support Scenic Byways Resolution
BACKGROUND/CONSIDERATION: Mr. Chris Moritz has requested that we
consider formal support to establish a Montana Scenic Byways
Program. I have enclosed information/background for your review.
We have compiled a resolution supporting this program for your
consideration and/or approval. If you decide to approve this
request the resolution should be approved.
A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A MONTANA SCENIC BYWAYS PROGRAM; AND TO
DECLARE AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, many Montana roads travel through areas of unique
scenic, historical, cultural, recreational or archeological value
whose enhancement and protection benefit Montanans and tourists who
travel our state; and
WHEREAS, once designated, Scenic Byways provide amenities such
as signing unique to the locality, scenic overlooks, rest areas,
bicycle lanes, interpretive centers and promotional brochures, and
WHEREAS, an established state Scenic Byways program would
facilitate local land use decisions that enhance and protect unique
road corridors. Such as program encourages grassroots initiative,
state-wide guidelines, open doors to funding opportunities; and
WHEREAS, those thirty-five states with Scenic Byways programs
benefit from increased federal funding, resource protection and
economic growth; and
WHEREAS, groundwork for a Montana program is complete. In
1994, a committee completed a feasibility study, developed criteria
and drafted legislation for the 1995 Legislature. The Department
of Transportation, the agency with Scenic Byways program authority,
and Governor Racicot supported the bill, but it was tabled by the
legislature; and
WHEREAS, the 1993 Legislature valued the program enough to
appropriate funds to match federal funds to implement the program;
and;
WHEREAS, a locality is unable to participate in the National
Scenic Byways Program until Montana adopts a state program. The
Montana Transportation Commission has chosen not to participate in
the national program until the Legislature authorizes a state
program,
j\wp\res\byway 1
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS:
SE-C=X-1: WE SUPPORT LEGISLATION TO ESTABLISH A MONTANA
SCENIC BYWAYS PROGRAM.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR OF THE CITY
OF KALISPELL, THIS DAY , 1997.
Douglas D. Rauthe, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debbie Gifford, CMC
Clerk of Council
j\wp\res\byway 2
To Preserve Montana's Scenic,, Recreational and Historic Heritage
Scenic byways (or highways) are roadways
that provide an enjoyable and -special experience
for travelers. They are typically roads having
significant cultural, historic, scenic, geological or
natural features. The corridor, often includes
vistas, rest areas, interpretive sites, and access
to recreational opportunities.
Scenic byways aid communities by attracting
tourist revenue to the their local economy. The
1991 Federal Highway Administration National
Scenic Byways Study estimated that $1 billion in
revenue was generated nationwide in tourist money
by scenic byways programs. Designation and
protection of byways' scenic, historic and
environmental resources is one way to preserve
Montana's beauty and heritage for Montanans and
visitors.
Creation of a state program also would give
Montana communities the option of nominating a
local road as a National Scenic Byway or All -
American Road and access to some of the
earmarked federal funds now going to other states'
programs.
What states currently have scenic
bywaysprograms?
ams?
Oregon began their scenic byways program
decades ago. Today twenty-seven state legislatures
have authorized some form of scenic roads
program. Eight additional states have programs
authorized solely by the state's executive branch.
The strongest state scenic byways programs
establish clear designation criteria. require a locally
developed corridor management plan and ways to
protect: scenic, historical and recreational
resources.
MontanaHas the groundwork been done for*
scenic! ! ♦ * i it
Vest In 1994 Montana received special federal
funds and conducted a study on the feasibility,
scope and objectives of a Montana scenic byways
program. Twenty-two groups were represented on
the Advisory Committee. They recommended
passage of a bill which would have established a
Montana program under Montana Department of
Transportation's (MDT) authority. The Montana
Transportation Commission and Governor Racicot
endorsed the bill. Un'otunately, it was tabled in a
legislative committee early in 1995.
A scenic byways bill will be reintroduced in the
1997 Legislature.
Whatis the new Y
nic
Byways ,.
Although states have made much progress on
their own, many urged Congress to provide
additional funds and to create some form of
national program. As part of the 1991 Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA),
Congress allocated $80 million for a National
Scenic Byways Program and included special grants
for state programs.
A Scenic Byways Advisory Committee was
established to develop designation criteria.
operations and maintenance standards for the
National Scenic Byways Program. On their
recommendation, Congress created and funded an
Interim national program, in July, 1995. It sets
forth the criteria for the designation of roads as
National Scenic Byways or All -American Roads
based upon their scenic, historic, recreational.
cultural, archeological and/or natural intrinsic
qualities.
A state's participation in the national program
is entirety voluntary. Any Iocality may nominate a
road for national designation. The nomination
must, however,. be submitted through a state's
identii%d scenic byway agency. Montana s agency
is MDT. Until the legislature authorizes MDT.
Montana will be unable to nominate roads or
participate in the benefits of a National Scenic
Byways Program or a state program.
4
.o • .,emu w.n. az , ..
I t- c. r: z.- i.. t,.<.b :.,a e.•'::a a.na #; 6..E.. i.f sFa'? G.;ta'
J,
The major source of funds for scenic byways
programs is through ISTEA. Of the $10 million it
earmarked for states during 1992-94, Montana
tceived grants to develop a proposal for a state
genic byways program and to create a visitor
center on the Beartooth Highway.
Congress has since allocated $14 million for
each of fiscal years 1995. 1996 and 1997 to
implement the new national program and provide
grants and technical assistance to the states.
State grants are for: 1) planning, design and
development of state scenic byways programs. 2)
preparing existing byways for national designation,
and 3) enhancing or improving existing National
Scenic Byways or All -American Roads. A match of
80% federal. 20% state money is required.
Eligible grant projects include:
planning, design and development of state
scenic by programs.
safetv and access improvements to currently
designated scenic byways.
construction of pedestrian and bicycle uses
along highways, rest areas. turnouts. highway
shoulder improvements, passin6 lanes
overlooks, and, interpretive facilities, -
protection of historic and cultural resources
development of tourist information-- signs.
brochures, tapes. maps, etc.
Another source of funding for scenic byways is
Community Transportation Enhancement Program
(CTEP) funds. ISTEA provided that 10% of _all
federal -aid highway funds (STEP) that come to
Montana be used for enhancements such as those
listed above, pins:
acquisition of scenic easements and historic or
scenic sites.
• landscaping and other scenic beautification.
rails -to -trails --preservation of abandoned
transportation corridors. '
rehabilitation and operation of historic
transportation structures.
archeological Planning and research.
control and removal of outdoor advertising
mitigation of water pollution due to highway
runoff.
ReauthorizationIncluding CTEp f:
funding for byways,. i
cotsi3Oer-aVovks, Covere". , ., r. / •
R
r
to continue Its .t` share for
projects.. the ,a.
grantsReauthorization would allow Montana to apply
for
authorized by the 1997,
Program?
Who is advocating for a Montana
Scenic Byways
Citizens throughout Montana. Citizens groups
such as ours and other statewide groups have
begun an educational campaign to bring infor.
mation about the benefits of having a state
program to Montanans.'` -
Please contact us to help or for more information:
F.Tas
Phone
Yes! I want to help bring a scenic byways
program to Montana
Please send me more information.
134
MYTHS SURROUNDING SCENIC BYWAY PROGRAMS
Many of the state programs. started decades ago, and the recently esttLbli�hed
national program pro%Ade an opportunity for localities to designate byways in
their areas. 1 Participation lia the above programs is voluntary.
Designation s road as r will • truckingI
commerce * i orr.
truckingFederal. law prohibits the stopping of trucking or commerce on any federally
funded highway unless specillc safety 'problems exist.2 Of the miles of
designaf.ed Scenic Byways in the U.S.. 85% do not disallow
or
commerce, 14% do so based on terrain (Forest Service roads) and 1% do so for
Myth #3: Funds expended on a Scenic Byway wilL reduce hIghway
jundsfor roads in. other areas.
lobbying
Under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTF.&) of'. 199 1, a
separate, grant funding source was established for the national progran cand to
assist state Programs,4 Montana would not see its federal �llotment decreased
if it were to receive Scenic Byway funds. Citizens and tourism groups are
•r continuance of those funds in the reauthorizatton of
scheduled for the M
of
1997.
Myth #4: Montana already has a program since Scenic Byway signs
are on some roads.
There are lave Forest Service and three Bureau of Laud Management Scenic
Byways signed In Montana.5 They were designated through those federal
agencies' programs, not a Montana one. HOWEVER, areas such as the
Gallatin Gateway, Mission, Flathead, and Bitterroot valleys or other areas not
surrounded by federal land are ineligible for that designation. The Montana
Department of Transportation (MDT) has said there must be legislative'
authorization for a Montana program before those areas can seek Scenic Byway
status. either state or national, and receive federal grant funds.
(continued)
Nu It 0-5e- if a road Is a Beanie
it cannot have off-premlse
s
advertWnq r bffUKmrds.
HighwayThe Scenic Byways.ones may #1.. #:. But a 1995modification in the
National Highway System funding legislation allows states 'greater leeway to
allow billboards within commercial and industrial segments of state and
federal byways. The law also requires that the exclusion —have a 'reasonable
basis'ft and not evade federal requirements.6
The HBA also allows alternative advertising on "erally funded roads that is
compatible with the area's character. Tourtst Oriented Directional Signs, sign
islands and Information rest areas are among the alternatives allowed. A local
govern.ment has the right to regulate and determine off -premise advertising by
ordinanc.e (a rt&t granted by the U.S. Supreme Court.)7
Myth#6,- Scenic Byway designation wILL not -respect privatel,
property rights.
Corridor plans include plans for FUTURE uses and assistance for enhancement
of existing uses. The corridor management plan can provide a practical
balance between private property rights and the public good (maintaining the
Intrinsic. values of the corridor) through the application of such traditional
tools as land -use zoning, the conveyance of easements and et.-anomic
Montana law allows continuance of lawful uses made nonconforming-8 In the
event of any taking, the U.S. Constitution and the Montana Constitution
provide that Just compensation must be provided when, private property is
taken or damaged for public use.9
_IIJG44!77-1777
1 Notice of FHWA, interim policy. National Scenic Byways Program, Federal Register, Vol. 60. NO. 98,
Thursday May 18, 1995.
2U.S. CFR 658 entitled "Track Size Arid Weight. Route Designations' 658.21 Reasonable 658.21
Reasonable access.
3 n Analysis an a 19 O cen c B tud to . December 1990. prepared
for the Federal Highway Administration.
411.R. 2950-85 1991 %terrnodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act Sec. 1047 (3) (d).
` e t f olio to ro o s . July 31, 1992.pp.24-
25
@National Highway Systems Designation Act of 1995. Public Law 104-59, Sec. 314 as interpreted in
National Recreation Coalition Newsletter, Dec. 1995, Washington. I.C.
'Metromedia v. San Diego 453 U.S. 490, City of Los Angeles v. Vincent. 466 U.S. 789.
8 Montana Codes Annotated 78-2.208.
QMontana .Attorney Genera +s Guidelines and Checklist required by the Private Property ,assessment
Act. Chapter 462. Laws of Montana (1995) pl.
i. • 3 by volunteers
Montana,Save Scenic