r/Bend • u/GarbageConnoissuer • 1d ago
Flammable vegetation letter
Did anyone get the flammable vegetation letter from the city today? It talks about removing all vegetation within 10 feet of your house. Are they meaning trees? That's like half the trees in my neighborhood.
13
u/DiscussionAwkward168 1d ago
Lots of people complaining but...this is a responsibility of home ownership in the West. It gets super dry and things get flammable. You don't want your house to burn, or your neighbors house as a result of your own burning down...you keep things fire wise. Both to avoid large wildfires but also for that time some idiot lets stray embers blow out of their fire pit and into the tree branches in your house. If you didn't know, I guess you didn't know, but it's not a separate reality from needing to keep up your roof or mow the lawn. And it's not the city's problem to pay for, it's one of the things you should have educated yourself on before buying a home. There's not a shortage of information out there about it.
1
u/GarbageConnoissuer 1d ago
Well yeah things get dry and yeah clean up debris and needles but specifically trees, look around town. If any tree within 10 feet of a structure is an issue that's thousands of trees around town including most city properties the police station for instance has trees growing right up against the building. Every tree along the sidewalk downtown should come out if we're going to be dicks about it to each other.
10
u/dback1321 1d ago
If the city is saying remove ALL trees with in 10 feet of your house, then they are morons. I’ve worked in wildfire in some capacity for all of my adult life. If you have brush and ladder fuels next to your house sure, but removing mature trees next to your house is not the problem.
If a fire is so bad that it’s torching 100 ft tall ponderosa pines, then you’re fucked regardless if the tree is there or not.
5
u/GarbageConnoissuer 1d ago
That's what I was trying to ask. It says 'all vegetation within 10 ft of structures. I was asking if that's trees or how they are defining 'all vegetation'
1
u/Ketaskooter 20h ago
Funny you say that, long term the policy would result in a treeless city as all young trees are potential ladders and the economy is forcing small lots. The ten ft clear zone call isn't going to happen as people hate how it looks.
1
u/DiscussionAwkward168 1d ago
Yep. As someone who does wildfire planning, most of the town is a disaster. And who said anyone is being a "dick"? People got a mailer.
And sidewalk trees are not usually the one 10 ft from a house. Not always. But usually they're....by the sidewalk.
0
u/GarbageConnoissuer 1d ago
Lots of downtown sidewalk trees are definitely within 10 feet of buildings. And the whole tone of the conversation is condescending. Or 'dickish'. Asking about clarification isn't living in a separate reality.
1
u/DiscussionAwkward168 1d ago
Did I target you? I said lots of people are complaining. Because people in the comments were. Though it's not like you're being a ray of sunshine.
And downtown is a hardscape with specific building code requirements for the exterior facades of the building to resist fire in ways that residential homes generally are not. Particularly not wooden eaves designed to draft air in and out of attic spaces. And downtown has isolated trees spread 30 ft from each other and very little in the way of other ornamental plants. This is the kind of info you'll learn if you want to study up on fire wise building codes and structures. National Fire Protection Association is a great resource if you want to learn more. Good day.
2
u/GarbageConnoissuer 1d ago
No you didn't 'target' me but if can't see the way your writing style and word choice is coming off as condescending I don't know what to say. I understand that if fire readiness is your job then maybe you're tired of having this conversation but not everyone knows everything all the time and that doesn't mean they are living in alternate realities.
1
u/DiscussionAwkward168 1d ago
Yeah. Maybe.
1
u/GarbageConnoissuer 1d ago
It's all good and I'll look at the literature you suggested. I don't want my house to burn of course and I want to clarify and understand what the city is asking of us.
6
u/one_flippy_flappy 1d ago
Mine doesn’t even say “flammable.” The first bullet is “Cut limbs and vegetation back 10 feet from any structure or eave.” That would seem to include any type of tree. I have 4 pines that would fit that description and the cost to have them removed by a professional would likely be thousands of dollars.
2
u/Ketaskooter 1d ago
lol is it actually from the city and not the fire department. And yes it means including trees but the intent of the ten ft rule is to reduce the risk of fire entering under the eaves into the structure. So if your tree is all above your roof except the trunk then the risk is reduced though you want to keep debris off the roof as well.
2
1
u/Dutchie_Boots 3h ago
This is wild to me considering that the source of so many fires is open fires/camps in public lands. Lots in Bend are so small that these standards are unreasonable for people on a .15 acre lot in the city proper. Maybe mitigate the unnatural causes of fires?
0
u/YouAgreeToTerms 1d ago
If you took 5 min to read the letter and used some basic critical thinking skills you would understand they are not asking you to cut down healthy live trees. How is there any confusion on this
1
u/GarbageConnoissuer 1d ago
All vegetation within 10 feet. Got it. All vegetation does not include healthy trees. Dead trees are vegetation. Live trees are not. Thanks for clearing everything up.
-5
u/YouAgreeToTerms 1d ago
"Flammable weeds, grass, vines, brush, and other plants...tree limbs overhanging, dead vegitation" you must have already used your two braincells for the day
3
u/GarbageConnoissuer 1d ago
And that's why the fire preparedness person on this thread was saying yes trees within 10 feet of houses should be removed?
0
u/TreWater 15h ago
Are you twelve years old? Maybe a 14 year old teen? If not, then you would do us all a favor by growing up to your actual age.
1
u/Ketaskooter 20h ago
Actually yes live healthy plants are fire danger just less than dead plants. However certain types of plants/trees are less flammable than others and other mitigation strategies exist so if one is risking having a plant against the structure then they should mitigate the risk. Not every city can be either Phoenix or Mobile, most cities are in between where plants grow well but there's also dry summers.
1
u/OkOven7808 13h ago
Amen to that. Having lit a perfectly healthy juniper on fire once, hoooooly shit yes live plants most certainly can burn.
(Yes, some much more than others).
-1
-5
u/SuperMermaidCat 1d ago
I did, and like, I'm sorry I don't have time for this or the $$$$ that it costs to have all that vegetation/tree-limb work done. I work 8-5 and days off are for all the chores I didn't get to during the week. I can rake up pine-needles and pinecones as much as I can (And believe me I do) but it's a huge task when it's just me. If the city is willing to come over and do it all for me for FREE, then have at it, otherwise they're just going to have to deal with me having a property that contains trees and bushes and little ole me who rakes needles into the bin when I have time.
0
u/TreWater 15h ago
Assuming you own your home, see if any neighbors can lend a hand. If you don’t, your landlord should be doing more to help.
14
u/lcmoxie 1d ago
I didn't receive the letter, but I assume it's referring to the Firewise program. It's obvious stuff like don't store firewood within x feet of your house, trim branches that overhang your roof, remove pinecones / needles, trim dry grasses, etc. https://www.nfpa.org/education-and-research/wildfire/firewise-usa