The city’s fire chief is recommending relaxing the restrictions of backyard burning.
While it might sound counterintuitive, chief Grant Love’s recommendation to instate a more relaxed burning bylaw for January 2016 was presented to the Community Services Committee on Monday night, the latest step in a year-long process that was sparked by public pressure.
Despite some concern and comment from almost everyone around the council table, committee chairman Mark King moved the bylaw forward to next week’s regular meeting of council for a final vote.
Right now, urban areas are prohibited from recreational or open-air burning, nor can someone within that area even obtain a permit for one; only residents in rural areas are permitted.
But the proposed bylaw amendment calls for lifting restrictions will allow burning in all areas of the municipality, reflecting two distinct zones: an un-restricted burning area and a recreational burning area.
The non-rural zone, or “settlement areas,” are lands that are serviced by city water services and fire hydrants, which would allow for recreational fires only.
Those small, controlled fires would have to be set in a safe location six metres from any structure or adjacent property lines, must be burned in a manufactured burning appliance, and be fuelled by non-combustible materials no greater than 45-by-45 centimetres.
There are also time and wind restrictions within the bylaw, among a list of other rules.
“The addition of the ‘Settlement Area’ for burning will allow for more residents of North Bay to enjoy the “northern” lifestyle,” reads chief Love’s report.
Rural zones, on the other hand, are classified as those not serviced by city water and fire hydrants surrounding the settlement area, and would be eligible for both recreational fires and other types of open air burning, like agricultural open air fires.
Permits for all fire types would be required and are expected to range from $25-$80 annually, depending on the zone and fire type.The fire chief also said the permit application process would be made as easy and accessible as possible, with hopes of eventually moving to an online application.
Perhaps most importantly to those around the council table, Love said lifting the restrictions and allowing for more loose burning rules will come at no extra cost or employee requirement, despite their anticipating an initial hike in calls.
“I don’t see it costing us more money, per se, other than it will just cost us more diesel fuel, which in our budget is not very much at all,” Love said, estimating their fuel consumption at around $10,000 per year.
Each time a complaint is called in, the department would have to deploy a full-sized truck and crew incase another, more serious call comes in while they are reporting to the scene.
However, Love did say they intend on working with and utilizing bylaw enforcement, which they do already with certain types of calls. There will also be various fines for burning without a proper permit.
Love’s original report came before council in June 2014 after what he calls significant public pressure to lift the restrictions.
Council then approved the recommendations back in January of this year, at which time they authorized Love to submit a revised version of the bylaw with the two distinct burning zones.
On Monday, there was renewed concern around the table for residents burning without permits, not being able to accurately assess the wind conditions, increased complaint calls, and burning non-clean materials and wood.
Mike Anthony was the only committee member to vote against the bylaw recommendation. Last January, he voted against the recommendations on the premise that the chief himself said he wouldn’t personally support the idea of lifting the restrictions at the time.
Coun. Tanya Vrebosch suggested the fire department make the permit application more strict at first, ensuring proper due diligence is done by both the resident and the department. She suggested that each permit application come with a photo of the property and a 24-hour turnover period to give staff the time to investigate the property.
She also emphasized the importance of having a proper communications plan in place, suggesting the fire department work with local stores that sell the appliances to spread the message of safe burning.
With that campaign in place, Love said there would be no excuse for violating the rules and that a zero-tolerance rule that would be in effect immediately after the new bylaw is implemented.
“I see this is a privilege, not a right; if people are using it responsibly, paying attention to the conditions, and being considerate of their neighbours […], then ok,” said Coun. Chris Mayne.
“Legislating common sense is never easy to do,” he added. “For people that abuse the privilege, I’m hoping there would be the opportunity to withdraw that privilege from the resident.”
Despite moving the document forward though, King also expressed his concern after the meeting.
“I’ve got to be honest, personally I’m not overly crazy about […] the fact that we’re actually going to allow burning in the settlement area, which is where the fire hydrants basically are within the city,” he explained.
“I think the majority of council will support it and I think it will be a solid vote in favour of making that happen, from what I can ascertain at this point,” he added, “but you still get back to this issue of smoke, people, air, breathing and, most importantly, I really don’t think we can legislate to pollute people’s air; that’s just a personal feeling on my part.”
When it comes to the revenue generated from the permits, Love said they won’t be able to gauge how well people are going to respond until the bylaw is put in place.
“I think that’s hard to tell because, right now, we’re charging more for permits in the rural area than we would be under the new system, so I think it’s going to be hard to figure that out for the first little while,” he said. “But there were a lot of comments made by the public that they would like to have burning in all of the city, and that was really the driving force behind it.”
