Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout5c RFP Code Update ~ Plan ToolsProposal for Development Code Update Town of Fraser, Colorado June 23, 2017 601 N. Cleveland Ave. #7202 Loveland CO (970) 622-9811 info@plan-tools.com June 23, 2017 Ms. Catherine Trotter Town Planner Town of Fraser P.O. Box 370 Fraser, CO 80442 RE: Development Code Update RFP Dear Catherine: On behalf of the Plan Tools project team, I am pleased to submit our proposal to provide professional planning services for the Town of Fraser’s Development Code Update project. Our proposal is organized by the following tabs: Project Organization, Project Approach, Project Timeline and Fee Schedule. Plan Tools has the Colorado-based experience in land development codes required to accomplish the Town of Fraser’s objectives for this planning assignment. We are distinguished by our ability to deliver very high quality planning services on time, within budget and to our client’s satisfaction. Plan Tools engages highly qualified planning professionals on a project – specific basis. For the Fraser Development Review Update project, the Plan Tools team includes MDKR, Russell + Mills Studios and Colleen Hannon, a local planning professional. Our team is structured to provide a broad range of land use code expertise for Fraser, inclusive of development review, zoning reform, land use law, community design, graphic production and document formatting. Plan Tools is organized as a limited liability company, and I am the sole principal. During the past twenty years, my statewide practice has involved the preparation of over 25 land development codes in Colorado, many of which were in western slope communities. Our team is immediately available and stands ready to undertake your development code project. Please accept this proposal as our best thoughts on how to prepare a development code specific to the Town of Fraser that is easy to use, flexible, and creative. We look forward to your review of our proposal and qualifications, and an opportunity to discuss the project in more detail. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, PLAN TOOLS, LLC Martin J. Landers, AICP President PROJECT ORGANIZATION Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 1 Plan Tools, LLC Martin Landers, AICP - Project Manager/Principal Planner Serve as project manager for day-to-day management of all project tasks and team members, and point person for admin- istrative matters. Serve as principal planner for land use code consolidation and update. Co-facilitate all public workshops, work sessions and public hearings. Lead preparation of all land use code articles. West Slope Resource Development Colleen Hannon - Senior Planner Serve as senior planner for development review update. Co-facilitate all public workshops and work sessions. Coordinate on-going communication with project stakeholders. Lead preparation of development review and application procedures. MDKR Jerry Dahl - Land Use Attorney Serve as land use attorney for the project. Lead preparation of sign code update in conformance with recent Reed v Gilbert decision, and all other statutory and case law assignments related to the project. Assists principal planner with preparation of code diagnosis report. Attends adoption work session and public hearings. Russell + Mills Studios John Beggs, RLA - Code Graphics Serve as graphic specialist for the project. Prepare code graphics and illustrations using SketchUp and Adobe Creative Suite software. Prepare presentation exhibits for public workshops and work sessions. PROJECT TEAM Fraser Development Code Update ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING Martin Landers, AICP Plan Tools Project Manager/Principal Planner Jerry Dahl, Esq. MDKR Land Use Attorney John Beggs, RLA Russell + Mills Studios Graphics Town of Fraser Town Board Town Planning Commission Colleen Hannon West Slope Resource Development Senior Planner Catherine Trotter Town Planner Development Community Task Force Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 2 ABOUT PLAN TOOLS The Firm Plan Tools, LLC is a consulting practice that specializes in the preparation of comprehensive plans, development regulations and planning studies. The firm excels in providing targeted solutions to municipal land planning issues. Guiding Principle Plan Tools, LLC is dedicated to delivering high quality yet cost-effective planning services that meet the unique needs of small towns, suburban cities and rural counties. Areas of Expertise • Comprehensive Plan Updates • Development Code Revision • Zoning Mapping Programs • Wayfinding Signage Plans • Annexation Strategy • Land Conservation Techniques • Sustainability Indicators Clients Served Plan Tools has provided consulting services to public sector clients throughout Colorado. Clients include statutory towns, home rule cities, rural counties, and land conservation interests. Plan Tools has also complemented multi-disciplinary firms that require the addition of project specialists for their clients. Staff Capabilities Originally established in 1997 as MJ Landers & Associates, Plan Tools project teams are led by Martin J. Landers, AICP. Project team professional alliances include specialists in urban design, landscape architecture, transportation planning, meeting facilitation, land use law, land development market analysis, GIS mapping and graphic production. Plan Tools Location Loveland, Colorado Plan Tools Web Site www.plan-tools.com Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 3 ABOUT WEST SLOPE RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT The Firm West Slope Resource Development (WSRD) is a community development consulting practice that specializes in small town, rural, resort and agricultural communities on Colorado’s Western Slope. Guiding Principle On the ground, customer-oriented technical service embedded in the culture of each community. Context appropriate with a sense of humor. Areas of Expertise • Current planning • Code amendment • Meeting facilitation • Grantsmanship • Customer Service Clients Served WSRD has provided consulting services to municipal and county clients throughout Colorado’s West Slope. Clients include Montrose, Meeker, Rio Blanco County, Montezuma, Lake County, the Gunnison Valley Land Alliance and Granby. Staff Capabilities Originally established the mid-1990’s, WSRD provided on-call planning services in Colorado through 2013. Relocation for three years to New Hampshire provided the opportunity to learn new approaches to current planning in New England. Having returned to Colorado in 2016, WSRD is again available to serve clients on the West Slope. The owner, Colleen Hannon, possesses a Master’s Degree and Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Colorado. The focus of the firm has been current planning and development review with code amendment processes and content as an extensive part of that experience. WSRD Location Granby, Colorado Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 4 ABOUT MDKR Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister & Renaud LLP (“MDKR”) is a local government and litigation firm with offices in Lakewood. Collectively, the attorneys at MDKR represent eight Colorado municipalities as the designated City or Town attorney as well as serving as general counsel for several urban renewal authorities, downtown development authorities and business improvement districts. The Firm’s practice includes representation of private and governmental clients in condemnation, real property, local governmental tax and land use matters. We also serve as special counsel to numerous municipalities, counties and special districts on both sides of the Continental Divide in a broad variety of issues and litigation. MDKR’s current seven attorneys all have active local government practices. There are three Partners, one Of- Counsel, two Special Counsel and one Associates. Two legal assistants support these attorneys. The attorneys at MDKR and their experience are as follows: • Malcolm Murray: Condemnation, litigation and urban renewal. • Gerald Dahl: Annexation, land use regulation and representation of local government elected officials. • Charles A. Kuechenmeister: Municipal and special district representation, real property transactions. • Thad Renaud: Land use regulatory matters, land use litigation and local government. • Carmen Beery: Local government, including representation of elected officials and administrative proceedings. • Joe Rivera: Condemnation, litigation and urban renewal. • Sue Baker: Litigation and general local government representation. Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 5 ABOUT RUSSELL + MILLS STUDIOS The Firm Russell + Mills Studios is a consulting practice that specializes in urban design, urban planning, land planning and landscape architecture. Our firm works extensively with municipalities and public agencies on a myriad of project types. Our speciality is understanding land use and urban design to help illustrate and communicate planning objectives and directions. In addition to this, we also provide graphic design and mapping services for the preparation of comprehensive plans, development regulations and planning studies. Guiding Principle Our approach to design is collaborative and inclusive, working with stakeholders, our clients, and staff to create successful results that everyone on the team understands and supports. We believe that the two founding partners are integral in every project and each partner manages each project from start to completion. Relevant Areas of Expertise • Urban Planning - Comprehensive Plan Updates • Development Code Revision • Wayfinding Signage Plans • Streetscape and Public Plaza Design • Land Use Planning Clients Served Russell + Mills Studios has provided consulting services to public sector clients throughout Colorado and Wyoming. Clients include Cities, and statutory towns and State government. Staff Capabilities Russell + Mills Studios was established in 2007 by the founding partners Craig Russell and Paul Mills. Our office has a total of five staff members with an average experience of 12 years. Our firm is supported by such experience in all our projects. We have the capabilities to operate creative programs such as Adobe Creative Suite, and Google Sketchup. We also provide full AutoCAD capabilities. One of our signature elements are emotive eye level hand drawn perspectives. We create these perspectives in workshops and finalize at our office so public and stakeholders understand the design ideas and gestures being discussed in planning documents or area planning design efforts. Russell + Mills Studios Location Fort Collins, Colorado Russell + Mills Studios Web Site www.russellmillsstudios.com Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 6 Martin Landers, AICP Principal Planner - Plan Tools LLC Mr. Landers selected project experience specific to development regulations includes: 2017 Parachute Land Use Regulations Mr. Landers served as project manager and principal planner for the update of the Town of Parachute Land Use Regulations. The Parachute Land Use Regulations consolidate zoning, subdivision, signs, flood damage prevention and other municipal code provisions into one document. 2015 Brush Sign Regulations Mr. Landers served as project manager and principal planner for the update of the City of Brush Sign Regulations. The sign regulations are compliant with the Reed v Town of Gilbert Supreme Court decision and address local business objectives in an illustrative, user friendly format. 2014 Bennett Land Use Code Mr. Landers served as principal planner for the update of the Town of Bennett’s land use regulations, including zoning, subdivision, sign, flood damage prevention and other land development provisions. 2011 Fountain Sign Code Mr. Landers served as principal planner for the update of the City of Fountain’s Sign Code. The sign regulations address new technologies in the sign industry in an illustrative format. 2010 Fort Morgan Land Use Code Mr. Landers served as project manager and principal planner for the update of Fort Morgan’s 1950’s era land use regulations. The Fort Morgan Land Use Code consolidates zoning, subdivision, sign and other municipal code provisions, into one document. 2009 Las Animas County Land Use Regulations Mr. Landers served as project manager and principal planner for the consolidation and update of the zoning, subdivision and 1041 regulations for Las Animas County, Colorado. 2008 Brush Development Regulations Mr. Landers served as project manager and principal planner for the consolidation and update of the zoning and subdivision regulations for the City of Brush, Colorado. 2007 Vigo County Unified Development Code Mr. Landers served as principal planner for the update and consolidation of land use regulations for Vigo County and the City of Terre Haute Indiana. Pre-2007 • 2006 Archuleta County Unified Dev. Code • 2005 South Fork Land Use Code • 2005 Monte Vista Land Use Code • 2004 Rio Grande County Land Use Code • 2003 Commerce City Unified Dev. Code • 2002 Granby Land Use Code • 2002 Mesa County/Fruita TDR Program Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 7 Relevant Experience Extensive experience on the Western Slope of Colorado in current planning, code amendment, facilitation, grantsmanship and customer service. Specialization in small town, rural, resort and agricultural communities. Community development consulting at both the municipal and county levels. Evaluation and Revisions of Granby Ranch Design Review Guidelines, Granby, Colorado. 2016-present As staff to Granby Ranch Design Review Board, have initiated review of current guidelines for revision in fall, 2017. Guidelines address site considerations, architectural design, and process for single family, multi-family and enclave development for 5,000 acre resort community in Granby, Colorado. Annual Development Code Amendments, Town of Holderness, New Hampshire, 2013-2016 As staff to the Planning Commission, prepared development code amendments for annual Town Meetings. Generally, a maximum of only six amendments were balloted and presented to the Town each year. Amendments included housekeeping changes; process; and standards. Examples included sign standards; code definitions; accessory structures; solar application siting standards; wetlands standards; siting of water and sewer facilities; and more. During tenure, all zoning amendments on municipal ballots were passed. Revisions to Subdivision Regulations, Town of Meeker, Colorado. 2011 Review of and recommendations for amendments to the Town of Meeker’s subdivision standards. Partnered with PlanTools, LLC. Current Planning, Rio Blanco County, Colorado. 2006-2009 On call planning services performing current planning tasks. Managed development review process and advised Boards and administrative staff on process. Revisions to Lake County Land Development Code, Leadville, Colorado. 2007-2011 As on call consultant to the County, responsible for drafting amendments to Land Development Code as directed. Specific amendments included standards for short term rentals; residential solar application siting; use categories by zone; delisting of Operational Units from EPA Superfund Site; and others. Drafted update to IBC with local amendments for adoption by Board of Commissioners. Review of Proposed Code Amendments relating to commercial developments greater than 100,000 sq. ft., Gunnison Valley Community Alliance, Gunnison, Colorado. 2004-2005 Provided technical review and critique of City of Gunnison’s proposed big box standards for citizens’ advocacy group. Revisions to City of Gunnison Land Development Code, Gunnison, Colorado. 1996-2004 As Interim, and then, Director of Community Development, initiated numerous development code amendments including overhaul of development code as well as specific amendments such as sign standards; accessory dwelling units; definitions; road standards; development review; and others. Colleen Hannon Senior Planner - West Slope Resource Management Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 8 Education B.A., Political Science, University of Colorado, 1972 J.D., University of Colorado, 1976 Professional Experience Since 1976, Mr. Dahl has practiced in local government law, dealing with all aspects of land use, annexation, gov- ernmental liability, personnel and government operations. From 1984 to 1990, Mr. Dahl was General Counsel to the Colorado Municipal League. He represented the League in legislative matters before the Colorado General Assembly and supervised the conduct of litigation including participation by the league as amicus curiae in cases involving substantial statewide questions of municipal inter- est. From 1978 to 1984, Mr. Dahl was General Counsel to the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments. His work for this client involved litigation of water and land use matters and extensive drafting and defense of county and municipal zoning and subdivision regulations. Mr. Dahl represents private and government interests in the planning and development of land. His practice in this field is statewide. He has authored numerous complete land use codes for municipalities and counties. He specializes in land use code diagnosis and revision to implement planning goals. He is a frequent speaker on land use and local government issues. Representative Clients City of Wheat Ridge Town of Georgetown Town of Morrison Colorado Municipal League Professional Memberships Colorado Bar Association International Municipal Lawyers Association Representative Publications Colorado Land Planning and DevelopmentLaw, APA, 2016 Annexation in Colorado, Colorado Municipal League, 2014 Amendment 41: Ethics in Government, The Colorado Lawyer, 2010 Transferable Development Rights: Planning and Practice in Colorado, Colo. Municipalities,2010 Land Use Law, National Business Institute, 1998; 2000; 2003; 2008 Boundary Law in Colorado, National Business Institute, 1991; 1992; 1996; 2002; 2003; 2007 The ABC’s of Planning, Land Use and Zoning, Colorado Municipal League 1992; 1995 Gerrald E. Dahl Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister & Renaud, LLP Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 9 GERALD E. DAHL GENERAL & SPECIAL COUNSEL REPRESENTATION Municipality Dates Duties and Responsibilities City of Wheat Ridge 1995 - present City Attorney Town of Morrison 2014 – present Town Attorney Town of Georgetown 2012 – present Town Attorney; advise concerning HB1041 Regs El Paso County 2013 - present Advise concerning HB 1041 Regs; Fair Housing Act Town of Silverthorne 1991 - 2014 Town Attorney; drafted home rule charter Elbert County 2011-2012 Oil and gas regulations City of Fountain 2011 Revise sign code Chaffee County 1999 - present 1041 Regulations; minor subdivision City of Loveland 2008 Advise concerning annexation Town of Mountain Village 2010 to present Adoption & Implementation of Comprehensive Plan City of Fort Morgan 2010 Comprehensive revision of land use code City of Brush 2009; 2015 Revise land use code; revise sign code Town of Poncha Springs 1999; 2007 Revise land use code; Annexation Archuleta County 2006 New zoning regulations; update oil & gas regulations Otero County 2006 1041 Regulations (Areas & Activities of State Interest) Town of Granby 2002-2006 Annexation agreements and related documents Town of Frederick 2005 Annexation opinion letter Prowers County 2005 1041 Regulations (Areas & Activities of State Interest) Commerce City 2003 – 2004 Comprehensive revision of land use code Bent County 2003 IGA land use regulations Mesa County/Town of Fruita 2003 Land use IGA and implementing regulations for transferable development rights system City of Broomfield 2003 Implementation techniques for neighborhood plan; open space and land use regulations Town of Basalt 2003 Litigation defending land use regulations Town of Berthoud 2002 Annexation matters Summit County 2002 Comprehensive performance zoning code Routt County 2002 Revision of zoning and subdivision regulations Custer County 2000 IGA on land use and annexation City of Salida 2000 Comprehensive revision of land use code Las Animas County 2000 Comprehensive revision of land use code City of Trinidad 2000 Historic Preservation & Vested Property Rights Town of Westcliffe 2000 Comprehensive revision of land use code Town of Crested Butte 1998 – present Land use and annexation matters City of Leadville 1999 Comprehensive revision of zoning code Saguache County 1999 1041 Regs; Comprehensive plan implementation City of Glendale 1997- 1999 City Attorney City of Grand Junction 1998 Annexation matters Town of Yampa 1997-1998 Amended zoning, subdivision and municipal codes Town of Paonia 1995 Comprehensive plan; techniques for land use control Region XI Counties/Munic 1978 – 1984 Amend zoning/subdivision Regs-water quality control Town of Eagle 1981 Performance zoning land use code City of Aspen 1981 Consolidation of land use approval process Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 10 John Beggs, RLA Senior Landscape Architect - Russell + Mills Studios Professional Experience John Beggs has twelve years of experience in the Landscape Architecture profession. As a senior staff member John has helped design and develop graphics for Land Use Code projects as well as Design Guideline and Standards projects. John has worked with Plan Tools on numerous related projects and will bring this skillset to this project. Relevant Project Experience • Parachute Land Use Regulations, Parachute, CO • Platteville Development Code Update, Platteville, CO • Brush Sign Code, Brush, CO • Trinidad Wayfinding Signage Plan, Trinidad, CO • Bennett Design Guidelines, Bennett CO (Current Project) • Bennett Land Use Code Update, Bennett, CO • Fountain Signage Code, Fountain, CO • Glenwood Springs Infill Design Standards, Glenwood Springs, CO • City of Sheridan High Tech Business Park Design Standards, Sheridan, WY • City of Sheridan Gateway Standards, Sheridan, WY • City of Sheridan North Main Corridor Study, Sheridan, WY • Downtown Fort Collins Master Plan (Current Project) • West Elizabeth Corridor Study, City of Fort Collins, CO • West Central Area Plan, Prospect Road Corrdior Study, Shields Corridor Study, City of Fort Collins, CO • Cheyenne Downtown Place Making, Cheyenne, Wyoming • Sparks Nevada Comprehensive Plan Design Standards for Redevelopment/Infill, Sparks, NV • Pershing Blvd. Corridor Plan/Streetscape Design, Cheyenne, Wyoming • Boulder Civic Area Master Plan, Boulder, CO • Boulder Highway Transit Corridor Design Standards, Henderson, NV • Pagosa Springs Downtown Plan and Design Standards, Pagosa Springs, CO • City of Sheridan North Main Master Plan and Design Standards, Sheridan, WY • Fort Collins Downtown Alleys and Integrated Connections Master Plan, Fort Collins, CO • Fort Collins Downtown Alleys Concept Master Plan, Fort Collins, CO Representative Project: Town of Parachute, CO Land Use Regulations Plan Tools, LLC worked in association with MDKR, Kendrick Consulting and Russell + Mills Studios to reorganize, consolidate and update the Town of Parachute’s land development regulations. One of the Town’s primary objectives in updating the codes was to facilitate an efficient development review process with “user-friendly” land use regulations. Key document formatting enhancements include: • Establishing a protocol for separating content into distinct articles, e.g., most chapters have definitions which are compiled “glossary-style” at the end; • Breaking out subsections into stand-alone sections. With a complete listing of section titles, individual chapter provisions can be quickly located and reviewed; • Using tables to consolidate text; • Including graphics to illustrate sign types, architectural detail, vison clearance, and definitions for frontage, lots, yards and setbacks; and • Creating checklists to detail submittal requirements for each type of land use application. The Parachute Land Use Regulations were adopted in January 2017. Project Reference: Stuart McArthur Town Manager 970.285.7630 Representative Project: City of Brush, CO Sign Regulations Plan Tools, in association with MDKR and Russell + Mills Studios, updated the City of Brush Sign Regulations. The sign code was adopted in September 2015. During the course of the project, the Supreme Court issued its decision on the Reed v Town of Gilbert case. As a result, the new Brush Sign Regulations were crafted to comply with a higher standard for content-neutrality. Specific project objectives also included: • Be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; • Preserve and enhance Brush’s small- town, rural character; • Support business retention and recruitment; • Reflect contemporary technology; and • Address Interstate 76 business signage standards. Members of the community participated in stakeholder interviews and two open houses in an effort to identify what is right for Brush when it comes to sign location, number, size, height, design, and maintenance. This process resulted in standards for sign types not previously permitted, such as sidewalk signs, roof signs, and wave banners. Project Reference: Karen Schminke Assistant City Manager 970.842.5001 Representative Project: Vigo County, IN/ City of Terre Haute, IN Unified Development Ordinance In association with HNTB, Plan Tools prepared a new Unified Development Ordinance for the Vigo County Indiana Area Planning Department. The project was a cooperative effort between Vigo County and its largest incorporated municipality, the City of Terre Haute. A Steering Committee comprised of representatives from Vigo County and the City of Terre Haute guided the drafting of the new UDO. After preparing a code diagnosis report and creating an annotated outline, the existing Vigo County development regulations and City of Terre Haute zoning and subdivision ordinances were consolidated, updated, and supplemented with new code provisions. The clearly organized, user-friendly format of the UDO included numerous illustrations and tables, with both a master table of contents and individual chapter indexes and references. The result was a draft document that was never adopted, primarily due to political considerations associated with conflicting City and County planning objectives and roles. Project Reference: Jeremy Weir Executive Director 812.462.3354 russell+millsstudios Landscape Architecture + Urban Design + Master Planning 141 s. college ave., suite 104 fort collins, colorado 80524 p: 970.484.8855 e: info@russellmillsstudios.com sellmillsstudios.com BU I L D I N G M A S S I N G A N D F O R M S T A N D A R D S 20 COMMERCIAL USES BUILDING STANDARDS Commercial building standards allow for non-prefabricated building types and may be constructed with a variety of materials. These structures are intended to help create a streetscape character with variety, interest and clearly defined building entry points. The following standards and criteria shall apply to Commercial buildings. 1. Building Components. Building components shall include roof, fascia or parapet wall, walls, windows and trim at a minimum on all structures. 2. Fenestration. Windows shall comprise a minimum of 20% of each wall face on all primary building walls. 3. Roof Pitch. Minimum roof pitch on all sloping roof structures shall be 4:12. Flat roofs are acceptable and shall include a parapet wall with a minimum height of three feet from the roof plane. 4. Wall Plane variation. Wall plane variation along all building walls and faces shall be provided using at least 3 different material types and 3 different colors including roof, walls and window trim and/or casing/mullions. Variation shall be provided along building walls so that no more than 20% of any building wall is of one continuous material. 5. Materials. Acceptable materials for buildings include the following: a. Pitched Roofs. Composite shingles, concrete shakes, standing seam metal, rolled metal, tile. b. Windows. Glass, transparent, mirrored or tinted. Aluminum, wood or vinyl casings are acceptable. c. Walls. Steel, aluminum, concrete, vinyl or wood siding; concrete block, cultured stone, stone, stucco/EIFS, standing seam metal, brick, precast concrete. 6. Roof Plane Variation. Roof plane variation shall be provided where continuous roof planes exceed 50 feet. a. Cross gables, dormers, clear story roofs, nested gables or roof plane breaks are all acceptable means of roof plane variation. b. Parapet walls shall exceed parapet height a minimum of 1 additional foot for 30% of total roof plane perimeter. c. Pitched roof planes exceeding 50’ shall incorporate either a minimum of 1 cross gable or continuous clear story; or , 1 dormer or nested gable per 50’ of total roof plane length. 7. Building Entry Definition. Primary building entries shall be clearly defined through the following: a. The primary building entry area shall be a minimum of 15 feet in width. b. Building entry areas may be defined as projections; or building entries may be defined with recesses a minimum of 1’ in depth. c. A combination of windows and doorways shall comprise at least 50% of the building entry area. d. A pedestrian entry plaza or courtyard shall be provided with a total area of a minimum of 10’ by 10’. 8. Eaves and Soffits. Eaves or soffits shall be provided on all pitched roof structures. Eaves or soffits shall be provided at a minimum of 3’ projection from the face of the attached wall plane where gross building square footage exceeds 15,000 square feet. Where gross building square footage is less than 15,000 square feet, eaves or soffits shall be provided at a minimum of 2’ projection from the face of the attached wall plane. 9. Fascia. A fascia shall be provided at the termination of all pitched roof planes. The fascia height shall be a minimum of 8 inches. Gutters or other drainage appurtenances may be fastened to the fascia. 10. Building Height. Building height as measured from the crown of property entry road at the intersection of the Right of Way shall not exceed 45’ to highest point of structure. 11. Mechanical Systems. Mechanical systems shall be screened from view or located in areas not visible from public roads. Rooftop Material variation along all building wall faces Client: City of Sheridan, WY Russell + Mills Studios were hired by the City of Sheridan to help create standards for development within zoned gateway districts for the City. Russell + Mills Studios led the urban design component and illustrated the various standards for the docu- ment. The project entailed numerous public meetings, and presentations to the City Planning and Zoning Board. The stan- dards were adopted by the City. Sheridan Gateway Standards project experience BU I L D I N G M A S S I N G A N D F O R M S T A N D A R D S 19 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES BUILDING STANDARDS Light Industrial building standards allow for a variety of building types including prefabricated metal buildings. The basic, functional and clearly defined forms of historic industrial buildings in Sheridan and throughout Wyoming have been used as a basis for the Light Industrial building standards. These standards deviate from the Industrial building standards in the provision of roof plane variation. The following standards and criteria shall apply to Light Industrial buildings. 1. Building Components. Building components shall include roof, fascia or parapet wall, walls, windows and trim at a minimum on all structures. 2. Fenestration. Windows shall comprise a minimum of 15% of each wall face on a minimum of two primary building walls. 3. Roof Pitch. Minimum roof pitch on all sloping roof structures shall be 4:12. Flat roofs are acceptable and shall include a parapet wall with a minimum height of three feet from the roof plane. 4. Roof Plane Variation. Roof plane variation shall be provided where continuous roof planes exceed 50 feet. a. Cross gables, dormers, clear story roofs, nested gables or roof plane breaks are all acceptable types of roof plane variation. b. Parapet walls shall exceed parapet height a minimum of 1 additional foot for 30% of total roof plane perimeter. c. Pitched roof planes exceeding 50’ shall incorporate either a minimum of 1 cross gable or continuous clear story; or 1 dormer or nested gable per 50’ of total roof plane length. 5. Eaves and Soffits. Eaves or soffits shall be provided on all pitched roof structures. Eaves or soffits shall be provided at a minimum of 3’ projection from the face of the attached wall plane where gross building square footage exceeds 15,000 square feet. Where gross building square footage is less than 15,000 square feet, eaves or soffits shall be provided at a minimum of 2’ projection from the face of the attached wall plane. 6. Fascia. A fascia shall be provided at the termination of all pitched roof planes. The fascia height shall be a minimum of 8 inches. Gutters or other drainage appurtenances may be fastened to the fascia. 7. Building Height. Building height as measured from the crown of property entry road at the intersection of the Right of Way shall not exceed 45’ to highest point of structure. 8. Mechanical Systems. Mechanical systems shall be screened from view or located in areas not visible from public roads. Rooftop mechanical systems are not acceptable unless screened from view architecturally. Mechanical systems located in publicly visible areas including parking lots or roadways shall be screened with enclosures constructed of materials like or similar to those used on the building. Roof Fascia Windows Trim Dormers Clear Story Cross Gables Nested Gables Parapet Wall shall vary in height Roof plane edge length SI T E L A Y O U T S T A N D A R D S 14 a. Screening Fences/Walls. Fencing or walls used for screening shall be constructed of opaque materials including cedar, metal, vinyl, concrete block or other materials like or similar to those used in building b. Landscaping Screening. Landscaping screening shall be evergreen, minimum 6’ height when installed and spaced so that canopies meet at 70% of mature size. 3. Street Trees. Street trees shall be provided at 40’ o.c. spacing along all public ROW frontage. 4. Landscaped Area. Landscaped areas shall be provided at a minimum of 20% of the total lot area. All unpaved areas shall be landscaped with sod, seeded native grasses, or shrub beds with cobble or organic mulch. Shrub beds shall include a minimum of 50% of live plant material in total area when plants are at 70% of mature size. 5. Foundation Planting. Foundation shrub bed planting shall be provided at a minimum of 12’ width from all building faces visible from public ROW. 6. Trees. One deciduous tree shall be provided for every 4,000 sf of total lot area; one evergreen tree shall be provided for every 4,000 sf of total lot area. 7. Irrigation. All landscaped areas shall be irrigated using drip, rotors or spray irrigation for establishment purposes at a minimum. 8. Maintenance. Landscapes are to be maintained to a neat, clean, healthy condition free from debris and trash. This shall include all requirements for pruning, weeding, mowing, trash removal. Replacement of dead plant material is the property owner or tenant’s responsibility. All shrub beds shall be maintained to a weed free condition. Seeded native grasses shall not exceed 6” in height mown or otherwise. COMMERCIAL USES STANDARDS Commercial site layout standards emphasize a quality streetscape with building street presence, landscaping that contributes to the streetscape quality and clear, well organized circulation. The following standards and criteria shall apply to Commercial site layout. 1. Setbacks. Minimum setbacks shall be 20’ from ROW, and 15’ from rear and side yards. Underground improvements such as storage tanks and vaults are permissible within setback areas. 2. Screening. Screening in the form of landscaping or fences/walls shall be provided so as to screen all service areas, trash enclosures, and storage entirely from views along public ROW. a. Screening Fences/Walls. Fencing or walls used for screening shall be constructed of opaque materials including cedar, metal, vinyl, concrete block or other materials like or similar to those used in building b. Landscaping Screening. Landscaping screening shall be evergreen, minimum 6’ height when installed and spaced so that canopies meet at 70% of mature size. 2. Screening. Screening in the form of landscaping or fences/walls shall be provided so as to screen all service areas, trash enclosures, and storage entirely from views along public ROW. Foundation planting for Light IndustrialExample of no planting for Light Industrial Commercial setbacks ROW 20’ 15’ SI T E L A Y O U T S T A N D A R D S 13 3. Street Trees. Street trees shall be provided at 40’ o.c. spacing along all public ROW frontage. 4. Landscaped area. Landscaped areas shall be provided at a minimum of 20% of the total lot area. All unpaved areas shall be landscaped with sod, seeded native grasses, or shrub beds with cobble or organic mulch. Shrub beds shall include a minimum of 50% of live plant material in total area when plants are at 70% of mature size. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES STANDARDS Industrial site layout standards emphasize screening of undesirable site components and landscaping as a buffer from public view along roadways. The following standards and criteria shall apply to Light Industrial site layout. 1. Setbacks. Minimum setbacks shall be 50’ from ROW, and 50’ from rear and side yards for lots over 4 acres. Minimum setbacks shall be 50’ from ROW, and 15’ from rear and side yards for lots 4 acres and smaller.. Underground improvements such as storage tanks and vaults are permissible within setback areas. 5. Trees. One deciduous tree shall be provided for every 5,000 sf of total lot area; one evergreen tree shall be provided for every 5,000 sf of total lot area. 6. Irrigation. All landscaped areas shall be irrigated using drip, rotors or spray irrigation for establishment purposes at a minimum. 7. Maintenance. Landscapes are to be maintained to a neat, clean, healthy condition free from debris and trash. This shall include all requirements for pruning, weeding, mowing, trash removal. Replacement of dead plant material is the property owner or tenant’s responsibility. All shrub beds shall be maintained to a weed free condition. Seeded native grasses shall not exceed 6” in height mown or otherwise. Landscape area Industrial landscape area Building: 70,000 s.f. Walks/Plazas: 4,000 s.f. Parking/Drive: 68,000 s.f. Landscaped Area: 79,800 s.f. Total lot size: 217,800 s.f. / 5 ac. Total Landscaped Area: 79,800 s.f. 36% of total lot size R.O.W. Example Plan ROW Side Y a r d 50’ 50’ Light Industrial Setbacks for lots larger than 4 acres Light Industrial Setbacks for lots 4 acres and smaller ROW Side Y a r d 50’ 15’ SI T E L A Y O U T S T A N D A R D S 12 STANDARDS INDUSTRIAL USES STANDARDS Industrial site layout standards emphasize screening of undesirable site components and landscaping as a buffer from public view along roadways. The following standards and criteria shall apply to industrial site layout: 1. Setbacks. Minimum setbacks shall be 50’ from ROW, and 50’ from rear and side yards for lots over 4 acres. Minimum setbacks shall be 50’ from ROW, and 15’ from rear and side yards for lots 4 acres and smaller. Underground improvements such as storage tanks and vaults are permissible within setback areas. 2. Screening. Screening in the form of landscaping or fences/walls shall be provided so as to screen all service areas, trash enclosures, and storage entirely from views along public ROW. a. Screening Fences/Walls – Fencing or walls used for screening shall be constructed of opaque materials including cedar, metal, vinyl, concrete block or other materials like or similar to those used in building b. Landscaping Screening – Landscaping screening shall be evergreen, minimum 6’ height when installed and spaced so that canopies meet at 70% of mature size. Industrial landscape screeningIndustrial area with no landscape screening ROW Side Y a r d 50’ 50’ Industrial Setbacks for lots larger than 4 acres Example of street tree planting Example of street tree planting ROW Side Y a r d 50’ 15’ Industrial Setbacks for lots 4 acres and smaller SI T E L A Y O U T S T A N D A R D S 11 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE Pedestrian access from R.O.W. Screened loading and trash area 20’ setback from R.O.W. and 15’ from side and rear yards Parking on rear of building (guideline) Parking lot islands, one island every 20 spaces Street trees every 40’ along R.O.W. frontage Foundation planting along building frontage of R.O.W. Site Information: Lot size: 277,000 s.f. Building size: 68,555 s.f. Dec./Evergreen Trees: 69 ea. 50’ setback from R.O.W. and side and rear yards. (For lots 4 acres and smaller setbacks are 50’ from R.O.W. and 15’ from side and rear yards). Screened trash area Landscape screening Street trees 40’ o.c. Foundation planting where visible from R.O.W. Defined building entry (guideline) Parking lot islands (guideline) Pedestrian path adjacent to parking (guideline) Service area on rear or side of building (guideline) Site Information: Lot size: 245,052 s.f. / 5.6 ac. Building size: 39,765 s.f. Landscape Area: 137,382 s.f. (56%) Dec./Evergreen Trees: 61 ea. russell+millsstudios Landscape Architecture + Urban Design + Master Planning 141 s. college ave., suite 104 fort collins, colorado 80524 p: 970.484.8855 e: info@russellmillsstudios.comproject experience SHERIDAN HIGH TECH PARK DESIGN STANDARDS Client: City of Sheridan, Wy Russell + Mills Studios were hired by the City of Sheridan to develop design stanards for a new Tech Park the City was developing as an inititive for employment in Sheridan. The goal of the standards was to create an easy to use document that encompassed current zoning and illustrate develop- ment standards that were easily understood by the development community. The document used prototypical development to illustrate the various standard requirements and current zoning items. These test cases also acted as a standard review mechanism to test how the standards worked in a hyperthetical scenario. Sheridan High Tech Park Design Standards russell+millsstudios + Landscape Architecture + Urban Design + Master Planning Final Draft April 2011 SHERIDAN HIGH TECH PARK DESIGN STANDARDS Final Draft April 2011 9 Design Standards Prototypes 1. GENERAL INTENT The following prototypes are intended to illustrate an application of these design standards to clearly show how the primary standards are interdependent and combine to achieve the overall project goals. 2. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE SEEDA provided landscape in ROW Foundation planting where visible from ROW Trash enclosure Screened service area Parking islands every 25 spacesMaximize contiguous open-space Roofline variation every 60’Human scale building entry Parking located to side or behind building when possible Native seeding or turf Maximum building height 35’Pedestrian access from ROW SHERIDAN HIGH TECH PARK DESIGN STANDARDS Final Draft April 2011 11 Site Planning 1. GENERAL INTENT This document encourages the use of creative site planning approaches to complement the High Tech Park’s unique setting and will result in a lower impact development character that helps preserve aspects of the visual quality currently seen from I-90. The standards strive to help create an environment where visual emphasis is on building features and planting rather than parking and service ares. 2. OPEN SPACE Open space shall be used to buffer adjacent uses, provide foreground planting and create an overall campus-like feeling for the High Tech Park: A. Open space shall consist of landscaped areas, walkways and plazas including those within setbacks. B. Contiguous open space shall be maximized whenever possible 3. SETBACKS All buildings shall be set back according to the following distances: A. Light Industrial/Manufacturing buildings - minimum 50’ from road ROW, 50’ rear and side yard. B. Commercial/Non-Light Industrial buildings - minimum 25’ from road ROW, 25’ from rear and side yards. C. Individual, detached buildings shall be located no closer than twenty feet from another individual detached buidling on the same site. D. Underground improvements such as storage tanks/vaults may be placed within setback areas. Light Industrial/Manufacturing Commercial 25’ 25’ 25’ 25’ ROWROW 50’50’ 50’ 50’ Site planning shall maximize contiguous open-space whenever possible SHERIDAN HIGH TECH PARK DESIGN STANDARDS Final Draft April 2011 17 4. BUILDING MASSING AND FORM Provide human-scale features to avoid large, undifferentiated building masses: A. Human Scale Entries shall be developed for each primary building containing the following elements at a minimum: 1. Building entry projection at least 12’ beyond primary building face. 2. Overhang, canopy, awning, porch or other projection providing coverage for a minimum of 5’ at a maximum of 12’ in height. 3. Glass on a minimum of 50% of entry doors and windows w/multiple panes of glass. A combination of windows and doorways shall comprise at least 50% of total building entry projection width. Windows shall be a maximum of 5’ x5’ w/substantial molding, mullions or trim at least 6” in width. 4. Pedestrian scale entry plaza or courtyard - minimum of 10’ width from nearest parking area to building entry. B. Provide stone, concrete, or brick bases to help anchor structures to the ground plane at a minimum of 3’ height along each building face where exposed to ROW or within view of another adjacent property. C. Provide variation along building walls and faces using at least 3 different material types and 4 different colors including bases and trim. D. Provide variation along building faces so that no more than 50% of the building face is of one continuous color or material. Building entry projection at least 12’ beyond primary face 3’ base to anchor structure Overhang providing cover-age for a minimum of 5’ at 12’ max. height 10’ min.entry plaza 4 different material types and colors including base and trim No more than 50% of the building face of one continuous color or material Multiple panes of glass to comprise at least 50% of total building entry projection width russell+millsstudios Landscape Architecture + Urban Design + Master Planning 141 s. college ave., suite 104 fort collins, colorado 80524 p: 970.484.8855 e: info@russellmillsstudios.comproject experience LAKEWOOD SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE ILLUSTRATIONS Client: City of Lakewood, Co Russell + Mills Studios were hired by the City of Lakewood, Development Review, Planning and Public Works Department, to provide illustrations for the revised subdivision ordinance. The illus- trations were used in the document to assist in communicating to potential developers what the ordinance required and how specific terms meant to a typical lot, or lots. PROJECT SCOPE OF SERVICES Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 18 Project Scope of Services The proposed Scope of Services on the following pages is organized into three phases: Code Diagnosis, Code Update, and Code Adoption. Each phase has a task for community engagement activities, and Town staff roles are noted where applicable. The Scope of Services is based on our experience in preparing land development codes for other Colorado communities, and each task is tailored to Fraser based on our initial observations. After Town review and during contract negotiation, we welcome refinement as needed to ensure a successful project. Phase I. Code Diagnosis Task 1.1 Project Initiation Members of the Plan Tools team will meet with Town staff to review and confirm the project schedule, discuss project coordination and review protocols, and identify issues associated with administering the current development regulations and achieving the objective of implementing the Town’s new comprehensive plan. Town staff will be requested to compile a list of major concerns with the current land use regulations that have not been captured in the comprehensive plan. Members of the Plan Tools team and Town staff will tour the community to photograph, by zoning district, examples of local land use regulatory issues and development concerns. Task 1.2 Document Review The Plan Tools team will conduct a review of the Town’s land use planning documents, including the Fraser Comprehensive Plan and all sections of the Municipal Code associated with land use regulation. Town staff will be requested to provide electronic copies of the current land use regulations and other supporting documents deemed necessary to carry out the project. The product of this task is a “redline” (tracked changes) version of the Town’s existing land use codes with comment balloon notes. Task 1.3 Community Engagement The Plan Tools team will conduct a series of interviews with individual project stakeholders. Town staff will be requested to assist with identifying stakeholders and meeting scheduling. The Plan Tools team will also facilitate monthly meetings with a Town-appointed Development Community Task Force. Plan Tools will create and host a project website that can be linked to the Town’s website. The website will provide details concerning the project, including upcoming events, draft documents, and contact information. Online surveys for public preferences on code options and recommendations will also be available via the project website at key points in the code development process. Phase II. Code Update Task 2.1 Annotated Outline The Plan Tools team will prepare an annotated outline for consolidating and reforming the Town’s zoning, subdivision, and other land use regulations. The outline will consist of a draft table of contents and indicate 1) guidance for text revisions and updates, 2) where charts will be used to explain certain regulatory features and procedural matters, and 3) where graphics may be useful for illustrating complex definitions, zoning standards and subdivision details. A sample page of the proposed development regulations will be designed to serve as a template for the user-friendly code format. Members of the Plan Tools team will present the annotated outline to the Planning Commission and discuss any suggested refinements. One or more meetings during the same trip will be scheduled with Town staff and individual project stakeholders. Task 2.2 Draft Code Using the annotated outline as a guide, the Plan Tools team will completely rewrite and reorganize the Town’s land development regulations. At a minimum the rewrite will include: • General provisions, non-conformities, and enforcement; • Administration and procedures, inclusive of annexation; • Zone districts and uses; Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 19 • Development standards; • Special regulations (as appropriate, such as the sign regulations); • Subdivision regulations; and • Definitions This draft will consolidate the Town’s land use regulations, with refinements that implement the comprehensive plan and establish predictable rules and processes in a user friendly format that is legally sound. Town priorities to specifically address include: • The comprehensive overhaul of all development codes; • Updating land use application procedures and standards; • Reducing regulatory barriers to development; • Creating new regulations that are easy to understand and reference; • Incorporating recommendations from recent plans, studies and adopted policies; and • Additional priority topics identified by the Town. Members of the Plan Tools team will present sections of the draft unified development code in a series of Planning Commission work sessions and will discuss any suggested refinements. One or more meetings during each trip will be scheduled with Town staff and individual project stakeholders. Town staff will be requested to assist with meeting logistics. Task 2.3 Community Engagement Members of the Plan Tools team will facilitate two community workshops during this project phase. The first workshop will introduce the project and conduct a visual preference options exercise to obtain public input and comment. The second workshop will provide an opportunity for public feedback on key draft code provisions prior to public hearings. Both workshops will be structured as day long open house events to ensure good turnout. The Plan Tools team will also facilitate monthly meetings with a Town-appointed Development Community Task Force. Members of the Plan Tools team will attend one joint work session with the Board of Trustees and Planning Commission to present the draft development regulations, highlight key provisions and revisions, and obtain guidance for preparing the final draft of the development code. One or more meetings during the same trip will be scheduled with Town staff and individual project stakeholders. Phase III. Code Adoption Task 3.1 Community Engagement/Public Hearings Members of the Plan Tools team will prepare a revised draft of the development regulations incorporating all refinements from the Town staff, Board of Trustees and Planning Commission discussions in Phase II. Members of the Plan Tools team will attend one public hearing each before the Planning Commission and Board of Trustees to present the revised draft code along with comments summarized from the second community workshop. Prior to the hearings, the Plan Tools team will: (1) review and confirm public notice format and timing pursuant to state statutes and the Town’s Municipal Code, (2) prepare a cover memorandum summarizing key process events to date, significant issues and recommendations, (3) confirm the proper Planning Commission resolution and Board of Trustees ordinance format for recommendation and adoption of the new code, and (4) prepare for and facilitate any final amendments desired by the Board of Trustees to be incorporated at the conclusion of the public hearing, in the form of amendments to the adopting ordinance made by motion. Based on the outcome of the public hearings, the Plan Tools team will incorporate approved amendments into a final document. Electronic versions of the adopted documents will be produced and delivered, formatted in Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat software. PROJECT TIMELINE Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 21 Proposed Work Schedule Legend Stakeholder Interviews Task Force Meetings Public Open House Events Planning Commission Meeting Town Board Workshops Adoption Hearings Task # Task Description Phase 1: Code Diagnosis Phase 2: Code Update Phase 3: Code Adoption August September October November December January February March April 2017 2018 FEE SCHEDULE Development Code Update - Town of Fraser 23 Fee Proposal Labor Classification Hours $$Hrs $$Hrs $$Hrs $$Landers $100.00 264 $26,400.00 80 $8,000 160 $16,000 24 $2,400Hannon$90.00 73 $6,570.00 24 $2,160 33 $2,970 16 $1,440Dahl$200.00 56 $11,200.00 16 $3,200 24 $4,800 16 $3,200Beggs$75.00 40 $3,000.00 8 $600 24 $1,800 8 $600Total Labor 433 $47,170.00 128 $13,960 241 $25,570 64 $7,640 EXPENSES $2,830Total Cost $50,000 Subtotal $2,830 Note:Reimburseable project expenses estimated @ 6% of labor and include copies, meeting boards, mileage, and other direct expenses. Rate CODE DIAGNOSIS LABOR PHASE 1 CODE ADOPTIONCODE UPDATE PHASE 3PHASE 2