Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Restoration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Restoration plan and 8‑foot agricultural fence proposed to support farm use; commission seeks planting details
Summary
A restoration and agricultural‑use plan for a property with a prior wetlands disturbance includes a two‑year monitoring program, a multi‑species native planting palette and a proposed 8‑foot deer fence; the commission asked for a missing planting table and agreed the fence review could proceed as an RDA for the fence portion.
A restoration plan for a wetland disturbance and a proposed agricultural perimeter fence were presented Feb. 19 to the Dayton Conservation Commission as part of an enforcement matter for a property previously found to have wetland impacts.
Sean Callahan, a professional soil scientist and wetland biologist, summarized the restoration approach for the disturbed northeastern corner: site stabilization, topsoil placement where needed, a seed mix and a native planting palette designed to increase habitat value and achieve an 80% vegetative cover target during a two‑year monitoring period overseen by a wetland scientist. Callahan said the team would prioritize manual invasive removal (multiflora rose and oriental bittersweet) rather than chemical control where practicable and would use weed‑free straw and containerized native stock to reduce the risk of introducing invasives.
Callahan also described an agricultural perimeter fence to allow the owners to operate small‑scale farming and keep deer out. He said posts would be 12 feet long and buried about 4 feet (resulting in roughly 8 feet above ground), with post spacing at 15 feet and the use of temporary wetland mat systems to minimize impacts during installation. "8 foot is minimum to keep deer out," Callahan said; the plan proposes a 2:1 mitigation ratio for post impacts by creating a planted enhancement area adjacent to the eastern property boundary.
Commissioners noted the planting table and specific quantities were missing from materials provided at the meeting and asked the applicant to supply that sheet. The commission discussed whether the fence should be reviewed as an RDA (the applicant preferred an RDA for the fence portion) and agreed to accept a consolidated RDA submittal that breaks the fence components out for earlier review; staff asked the applicant to file the RDA and reach back to schedule the item for the March 19 agenda if materials are submitted by the deadline.
What’s next: Applicant to provide the missing planting table and an RDA focused on the fence and associated impacts; restoration plantings and monitoring will be overseen by a wetland scientist and the enforcement order will be lifted once the commission confirms successful plantings.
