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