Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks commission reviews draft natural-resources compensation guide and debates woodland replacement ratio
Summary
Franklin City Parks Commission reviewed a draft compensation guide to implement Article 7 of the Unified Development Ordinance, discussed replacing a reduced woodland mitigation ratio with a higher multiplier, and agreed to forward edits to the Plan Commission for fall consideration.
The Franklin City Parks Commission on May 11 reviewed a draft Natural Resources Compensation Guide intended as an administrative supplement to the city's Unified Development Ordinance, Article 7, and debated how much removed woodland must be replaced.
Planner Marian X., who presented the document, said the guide is meant to help developers and staff apply the UDO's natural-resource protections by offering preferred tree lists, plant species guidance and a clear framework for compensatory planting when natural resources are impacted. She told commissioners the guide is designed to make the NRSE/NRS process more consistent and less adversarial by spelling out expectations in advance.
Commissioners focused on a mitigation table (referred to in the packet as table 15-73) that sets compensation ratios for woodland and specimen-tree loss. Several members recalled a February discussion and asked why the current draft showed a lower ratio (0.75) instead of the prior 1:1 or the 1.5:1 some had advocated. "One large maple removes a substantial amount of water from the soil every day," one commissioner said, arguing for a higher replacement requirement to protect Franklin's natural drainage and canopy.
Marian X. and staff noted that some changes to numeric tables in the guide would require a formal UDO text amendment and Plan Commission review, while other editorial clarifications (spelled-out acronyms, plain-language definitions) can be made administratively. Commissioners asked staff to compile marked-up edits and specific recommended ratio language for a fall package to the Plan Commission and, if necessary, Common Council.
The commission asked that key abbreviations be spelled out in the guide, that the plant list and specimen-tree standards remain clear, and that recommended off-site mitigation receiving areas be mapped in advance to steer developers away from low‑value sites. Staff said a draft will be circulated in advance of the next meeting and will include a clear list of which changes require code amendment vs. administrative adoption.
The commission did not adopt a final position at the meeting; members directed staff to return with a marked draft and a recommended course of action to forward to the Plan Commission.
