Chronic blasting violations could be hidden by poor monitoring, say city staff, who plan a complete overhaul of Halifax Regional Municipality’s blasting bylaw in the new year.

Staff fear miscalibrated instruments wrongly placed could be resulting in undetected infractions.

One of the problems, they say, is that the city’s old blasting bylaw is not specific enough to offer the kind of protection many residents would like to see.

For example, says Jim Donovan in the city’s planning development office, there are no standards for the set-up or use of monitoring equipment that’s used to ensure rules are being followed.

And, he said, letting blasting companies hire their own monitoring companies contradicts common sense.

“It is like leaving the fox in charge of the henhouse,” Donovan said.

Blasting companies hire monitoring firms to ensure noise and vibrations emanating from the site are within guidelines. They’re also responsible for conducting a pre-blast survey of nearby properties before and after blasting takes place, and recording any damage.

The bylaw on the books today is actually a harmonization of the three bylaws in effect before amalgamation. At that time, staff recommended council adopt the most stringent regulations, but the industry successfully lobbied council to adopt the lowest standards.

“You would presume that the (blasting) industry is legitimate and professional, and that their practices are legitimate and professional, and that’s where we’re at with this; that’s what we believe. But when you start to drill into it, it exposes all sorts of opportunities,” Donovan said.

Armdale Coun. Linda Mosher, who lives within 150 metres of an area being blasted near Fairmount subdivision, has handled numerous complaints from neighbours since the booms began three months ago.

First and foremost, Mosher said, monitoring companies should be a disinterested third party unrelated to the blasting company they’re overseeing.

Mosher also wants blasting companies to notify all property owners within 800 metres of a blast site to ensure they know what’s going on, and what to expect.

“It can be frightening for somebody to have their house shake and not know whether their house can withstand the vibrations,” she said.

Mosher said so far about 100 residents in the Fairmount area have come forward with “perceived” damage from the blasting that will be reviewed by the blaster.

Donovan said the nominal blasting permit fee of $100 doesn’t even come close to paying for staff’s time handling such complaints, and it will likely have to increase.

Staff say they hope to have a draft of a new bylaw in place by February, and to hold a public hearing on the new regulations by March.

Mosher said she hopes people will take an interest in the bylaw, because blasting will affect every neighbourhood in HRM sooner or later.