Private Landing Sites (Merged)

[cyclic flare]

I have been operating helicopters out of my back garden / field for over 4 years. Yesterday received a letter from the local planners

" The council has recieved several complaints regarding the use of the land at the rear of your property for the landing and taking off of helicopters. What is not clear at this stage is whether the land forms part of your domestic curtilage or is other land withinn your ownership or control. As the lawfulness of the reported use may be dependent on the status of the land being used i request that you contact my senior investigation advisory officer so that arrangements can be made to visit the site"

The Site is a domestic property with one next door neighbour (Friend no problem he knew i operated helicopters for several years before i bought the property off him) Next nearest neighbour 1000 yards.

Rule 5 no problem green fields for as far as you can see.

Planning permission includes a private garden upto 16 meters away from the house, the remainder of the garden is classed as green belt agricultural. The landing pad does extend into the agricultural land so i am probably in trouble.

Anybody know the facts on private sites / agricutural land before the anti helicopter squad arrives.

By the way, weather permitting i am flying 3 - 4 times per week.

[muffin]

Cyclic

It is my understanding that the domestic curtilage bit is the crunch part. Perhaps you should quickly extend your curtilage to include the pad if you can do so up to the limit of your planning permission.. Otherwise you are dependent on the 28 day rule, which at your level of usage you are clearly above. One approach is 28 days in your field, 28 days in your neighbours field, 28 days in the field over the road etc etc

Otherwise find out locally who is complaining and give them a ride over their house to take photos ASAP.

Good luck

[What Limits]

This was covered in a thread some time ago, but here is some guidance from a very experienced back-yard operator!

The main points are:

1. He should be careful and concerned to keep the noise to a minimum, and not overfly his village.

2. Unless there is direct access from his garden to open countryside he is in breach of Rule 5, 1500 ft rule, congested area.

3. He can land in the curtilage of his house (i.e. the garden) without planning restriction or permission, provided it is for a purpose incidental to the use of the house as a dwelling - in the same way you can park your car at home. Commercial use would require planning permission.

This assumes it is a big enough garden to avoid endangering other properties. Landing within a few feet of another dwelling would probably be classed as endangerment by the CAA.

4. Aircraft are exempt from noise legislation, but it will do him, and helicopters in general, no good to use that in an aggressive way, and point 2 fingers at the council.

5. These problems are best solved by both parties being mature, restrained, considerate of the other party, and coming to a sensible compromise.

Hope this helps

[The Nr Fairy]

Limits:

I know you're only quoting freom another reply in a thread, but are aircraft exempt from noise legislation ? My understanding ( thanks Dave @ Farnborogh LARS ! ) is that the CAA are responsible for aircraft noise problems.

Or, as it's 11:15 on Friday and I'm sozzled, have I misread things ?

[What Limits]

AFAIK this is the case. The quote is from a reliable source who has had significant experience in this area.

Head above parapet again!

[Flying Lawyer]

Here's a quick summary of the general principles.
Warning: This is from memory. I have not looked up the law to see if there have been any changes since I was last involved in a case of this type.

Private Landing Sites
Planning consent is not normally required for helicopter operations from private property. You are permitted to operate from a private house without planning consent provided the landing site is within the curtilage of the property. ie the garden.
'Private' in this context means for the private or business use of the owner, his employees or anyone visiting him. Different considerations apply to general helicopter landing sites.

You are permitted to use your adjoining field as a 'temporary landing site' for up to a maximum of 28 days in any calendar year. Beyond that, planning consent will probably be required. (A field is classified as open land and using it for your heli ops would probably be regarded as a 'change of use' for which planning consent is required.)

All landing sites located in congested areas, whether permanent, temporary or private, require the prior written permission of the CAA. (See Rule 5 re approach/departure route(s).)


Noise
There is an exemption from an action for noise nuisance but it applies only to aircraft in flight over property, and provided the aircraft is flown reasonably in accordance with the standards of good airmanship. In the case of unlicensed heliports and landing sites, individuals are able to pursue a claim for noise nuisance whilst the helicopter is on the ground.

Good Luck!
Tudor Owen http://www.mwhelicopters.co.uk/MWHelicopters%20Left.gif

[muffin]

FL

I seem to remember from an old thread that the 28 day rule applies to land "under your control". ie If you own 3 separate fields at the back of your house, then you can only have 28 days in all of them combined. However, if the field next door belongs to a friend, then you can have 28 days in yours and 28 in his etc.

Is this correct?

[jellycopter]

Further question re. the '28 day rule'. If a helicopter is parked in your 'adjoining field' for a week for example, does this mean you've used up 7 of your 28 days? J

[Heliport]

jellycopter

It's the number of days you use your land as a temporary landing site which matters. ie The number of days on which there are movements must not exceed 28. There doesn't appear to be any restriction upon the number of days you can park a helicopter.

[Flying Lawyer]

cyclic flare

There's useful information about private landing sites on the BHAB website. Click here. (http://www.bhab.org)

Look at 'THE CIVIL HELICOPTER IN THE COMMUNITY.'
Section 4: Planning Legislation
Section 5: Environmental Issues


FL http://www.mwhelicopters.co.uk/MWHelicopters%20Left.gif

[Helinut]

I hesitate to contradict a moderator, but I don't think that Heliport has it quite right about the interpretation of the 28 day rule.

Remember, it is a planning rule, not specifically intended to apply to aircraft movements. Take "Car Boot Sales" as an example. They can do 28 of these horrible events on a site (one per day) without getting planning permission. Lots of car movements on/off the site in each of the days when the sales were on, but each sale only counts as one day's activity. In a similar way, I guess you could have a "fly-in" on a day to your field with lots of movements but it would only count as one day's worth off the 28 day limit.

IMHO, of course.

[Heliport]

"I hesitate to contradict a moderator ......"
Don't hesitate. My opinion about topics under discussion isn't worth more than yours or anyone else.
My earlier post was ambiguous. I've edited it to make it clearer, but it's still only an opinion.

Heliport

[jellycopter]

The next logical question in this debate is; 'What happens if you exceed the 28 days?' I would assume that if there are no complaints then equally, there's probably no problem. J

[Helinut]

In most cases, the local authority planning department won't be in the slightest bit interested, unless there are complaints - there is a moral there about keeping neighbours sweet, if you can!

If they receive a complaint, then one of their enforcement officers will investigate, and take it from there. As I understand planning law though, even if they can prove there has been a planning development for more than 28 days, they cannot prosecute at that stage. They may issue orders that prohibit you from continuing the use. I believe it is at this stage that, if you ignore the order, that they can bring out the big guns

[paco]

Here are the rules the last time I heard:

"The owner of a piece of land does not need special permission to use it as a Helicopter Landing Site provided certain conditions are met. Naturally, it must not be in a congested area, otherwise you will come up against the ANO. It must also be only for private or business use, that of any employees, or people specifically visiting for social or business purposes. Finally, no structure must be erected in connection with its use for helicopters, aside from temporary ones (such as windsocks), otherwise the Planning Permission (Zoning) people will become interested—there's no need to notify them of anything unless the land is to be used as a helipad on more than 28 days in any year. In fact, current planning regulations allow a helicopter to be used for personal, business and leisure uses “as many people use a private car” from the owner’s dwelling house without limitation, making it exempt from planning control, provided the use is incidental, or ancillary to, the principal use of the land. Also, the local police should be informed, as well as the other emergency services, especially where the public would normally have a right-of-way (such as a park).

In the USA, and probably Canada, you can land a helicopter anywhere that has not been declared as illegal, with the usual provisos about low flying and reckless operation, but be aware that local restrictions may well override any laid down by the FAA or Transport Canada."

Phil

[Hughes500]

Cylic Flare
You need a copy of Planning Policy Note 24 about Planning and Noise paragraph 18. This states that in general where helicopters are used from gardens or commmerical premises and their use is incidental to the prinicipal use of the land then planning permission is not generally required.

I have the same problems with the national Park I live in. What you generally find, the planning people do not have a clue about the law. so blind them with the law and hopefully it is so much hassle they will give up. Be nice to them as the authority will have received a complaint that they are obliged to investigate. If you show them you are in the know and far more importantly fly environmentally friendly they will go away happy.

You can always drop me an e mail and i will give you my phone number for a chat.;)

[B47]

Flying Lawyer,

I would be grateful for your view on the following:

Does the curtilage have to be domestic? My example would be a private house with an old farmyard (only used for keeping one old tractor, not commercial farming) where the landing site is within the (pretty large!) yard. Is there a distinction between the domestic curtilage and the whole curtilage? The whole curtilage being only the walled or fenced area around the property, no other land of course.

Also, is there any establishment of use or does this apply only to structure built i.e. landing pad? What's the rule now - 4yrs without comment and you're OK?

Thanks.

[md 600 driver]

b47

theres no way i would call your place a OLD FARMYARD mines more a farmyard than yours

steve

[rotorboater]

I seem to fit in with a lot of the above with being in a country area and a converted farmhouse etc.
Anyone know just how big a curtladge is, I have been extending the garden, which was once a field, for the last few years and although I actually land quite close to the house at the moment, I am thinking of landing a little further away (100yds) still in the landscaped bit and building a small agricultural building to store my tractor and other things in, it will probably have quite wide doors;)
I am not daft enough to tell the planners I want to keep my cutting equipment (choppers and the like) in there but if it is not in the curtladge thing I may have a bit of a problem.
As another thought, what if I landed in my curtladge and towed it to the barn, is that OK?
Sorry for all the whaffle and I am not too pressed at the moment as I have pretty good people around but you never know who will turn up from the peoples republic of Oldham at some time and I would like to have the right answers off pat.

[idle stop]

To reinforce a comment by What Limits, do make sure that you are not endangering either your aircraft and occupants or third parties in the way your aircraft is operated into a small LS. See ANO Art 53 & 54 or thereabouts. (From memory.)

[Helinut]

I am not sure that any of you guys looking for a definitive answer to your particular questions will get one (that is worth having). FL may disagree, but like most legal stuff, the final answer depends on the specific circumstances and facts of the particular case. As I understand it, the distilled wisdom? in the previous contributions is a fair summary. If you want more specific you will need a big cheque and a lawyer, who will ask you loads more questions.

[Flying Lawyer]

Helinut is right. I'm always very happy to help fellow pilots whenever I can but, on topics like this, all I can do is set out the relevant law / general principles which apply to all cases. The legal position in each particular case will depend upon its own circumstances and facts.

[B47]

Thanks Helinut,

I accept your overall point BUT, my two questions were quite specific and about the fact of the law, not my particular circumstances. They were only added as an illustration.

People commonly talk of 'domestic curtilage'. My first question is, is the specific term 'domestic' used in the legislation or PPG guidance notes or not? Or is curtilage always understood to be domestic?

Two, it is, again, commonly understood, that establishing a use without permission but without challenge or complaint gives you the permanent right after a certain period of time. My question is, is this true, and if so what is the number if years?

I tried hard to phrase my original question in specific terms i.e. precisly what does the law or PPGs say rather than what are the possible interpretations.

As someone who has fed many lawyers families over many years I do realise that asking anything less specific or particular to individual circumstances can only be answered after writing a large cheque.

So, FL, if you could help with these two question, again, I'd be grateful. Thanks.

[Hughes500]

B47

Domestic curtlidge is defined ( by my planning expert ) as your garden, driveway etc. Where you have padocks, fields etc etc these are not within your curtlidge.
However what you will find that you can extend your curtlidge by say simply taking down a fence between garden and field and asking where is the boundry ?? Or better still move your fence, you will find that most 1:10000 maps do not provide enough detail as to where the field boundries actually are. For you to be exempt from planning permission you have to have been doing things for 10 years without complaint.

Hope this helps, if confronted by planners ask the question what is the difference between landing in my garden compared to the adjoing field, this is what i did claiming I would make more noise by positioning into my garden than the field - after all the normal complaint is on noise rather than where you land, so if it is louder and for longer in the garden tell the planner, you will be pleasently surprised on the result.;)

[Flying Lawyer]

B47
Q1: Is the specific term 'domestic' used in the legislation or PPG guidance notes or not? Or is curtilage always understood to be domestic?
I haven't looked at all the legislation or PPG guidance notes so don't know whether the term 'domestic' appears, but curtilage is not always understood to be domestic.
The curtilage of a building is the land within which a building is set and which belongs (or once belonged) to it and is (or was) used with it. The extent of the curtilage can be difficult to determine, and it will often be small but not necessarily.
In any particular case, it can only be determined in the light of the particular facts involved. eg In the case of a farmhouse it may extend to adjoining barns, stables and sheds.
To determine what is within the curtilage of a building, it is necessary to consider:
the physical 'layout' of the building and the other structures;
their ownership, past and present; and
their use and function, past and present.

Q2: "It is commonly understood, that establishing a use without permission but without challenge or complaint gives you the permanent right after a certain period of time. My question is, is this true, and if so what is the number if years?"
Yes, it is possible to establish a use - See Hughes500's reply above. But it depends upon the particular circumstances of each case. It's not simply a matter of 'getting away with' something for x years earning the automatic right to be entitled to continue.

I'm sorry I can't be more helpful. I'd have to see the property to be able to give you any useful answers to your questions, and an opinion as to which way a decision is likely to go if challenged.

I'm involved in a long case not very far from you at the moment. If I get any free time, I'd be happy to look at it for you - FOC except for a ride in your B47 :) - let me know.

[jerry712731]

If this has been covered by an earlier thread please pont me to it.

I have a colleague who wants to use a paddock that he owns, adjacent to his home, but it is not part of the CURTILAGE of his dwelling.

What are the issues that he will come up against.......

He will only be using the site for private use.

Look forward to getting some responses as I have heard many differing views.

[Helinut]

jerry,

You are right this has been dealt with before - try a search in Rotorheads. It brings up a number of relevant threads.

There are 3 main issues though (UK):

1. Would it require planning permission?

2. Does it comply with the aviation regulations?

3. Is it safe?

Briefly:

1. If it is used more than 28 days per year, then probably/possibly. But it may depend a bit what changes are made to the land, if any. It is the use of the land that may require permission

2. This is mainly about Rule 5 of the Rules of the Air - we have had lots of threads about this one. All depends on the surroundings and how your friend flies.

3. If 2 is OK, then you are some of the way there. Lots of factors would determine whether it was sensibly safe. Assuming that your friend is a licensed pilot, his training should give him guidance.

Your friend could always raise this himself of course......

Lots of other people could give more detailed help, but it ends up being case specific.

[jerry712731]

Well the real question is Planning and the 28 day rule.

2 Sites have been proposed and planning permission sought.

The same planning comittee for both applications.

Both turned down, First site (adjacent paddock) on noise and protests by local residents. The second at a local airstrip where their planning excludes helicopters and jets. The residents had many letters against the the change for a Helicopter and the local planning comittee agreed with the residents and declined the the appilcation on lost of amenity in an ANOB.

Can somebody answer the following
28 day Rule
Can an aircraft be stored on the site (no hangar etc) without using up the 28 days ie Do Operating days count exclusively.

Has anyone else experienced similar problems and won against a council (and local residents) ?

I am sure that the sites in question meet with aviation regulations and are safe.

Jerry

[Vfrpilotpb]

Jerry ,

Your streching the limits by getting in there to start with, so why worry about storing the thing there!:confused:

[Ludwig]

I've often wondered about the 28 day rule. If let's say, your chum sets up 13 separte life interest trusts with himself as life tenant and transfers a slice of land equal to 1/14th of the whole, retaining 1/14th for himself, as each would technically have a different legal owner, ie yourchum number 1 trust, yourchum no2 trust etc, could he operate with impunity on every day of the year just by landing in a different 1/14th sector each day?:confused:

[Pilotage]

I seem to recall seeing a guide to getting planning permission (and presumably operating safely) from small private strips published by the British Microlight Association.

Might be worth giving them a call on 01869-338888 and seeing if you can beg/buy/borrow or steal a copy.

P

[jerry712731]

The feedback is interesting but I think the Local residents objecting is the real problem :{

Getting the "Locals" and planning office to willingly accept a helicopter operating from these 2 sites must be the goal.

The main issue is noise and the loss of amenity (noise).
For an unlimited budget, local sponsorship, PR would all help but in the real world this will not happen.

The next nearest licensed airfield is about an hour hour away and the benefit of owning a helicopter disappears if you have to spend several hour travelling and then the landing and hangarage costs.

I am sure other people on this forum have been in similar situations and have over come this problem, thier help would be most welcome.

I have searched for other threads "Private Sites" "Planning permission" "helipads" and none have come up with much to help.

The BHAB has a good article about setting up a site but over coming / working with the Planning authorities is not covered

Still hope to hear from somebody who have been through this

[Robbo Jock]

Join AOPA and ask their help/advice. They have a wealth of experience helping set up strips/pads and fighting the closure thereof.

[Flying Lawyer]

It seems as though your friend's problems lie with NIMBYs rather than complying with aviation safety requirements and good practice, but he would be wise to familiarise himself with the relevant regulations and guides to good practice.

BHAB Sitekeepers Guide (http://www.bhab.flyer.co.uk/sitekeepers.htm) which include Helicopter Site Keepers - Guidelines (http://www.bhab.flyer.co.uk/sitekeepers.htm) issued by the CAA.

Tudor Owen

[Vfrpilotpb]

Extending your curtlidge would do no harm, but this act in itself could take up to 28 (Council) working days to acheive and will involve a site visit by the planning officer, who will be aware of the problems that you are facing so could be jaundiced in his agreement with extention, I went through this a few years ago to enclose part of a wood with my garden, you'd have thought I wanted to steal their daughters the way they( the planners) went about this site inspection!

Best of luck!

Peter R-B

[Hughes500]

Guys

The 28 day rule is applicable to individual fields. It matters not a jot who owns them.
What you have to consider is the local authority have maps that indicate field boundries, so don't put up lots of fences and take the p***.
The most important aspect to this is - find out what the complaint is. You have the right to see the complaint letters but not from whom. Most will be a noise issue not a planning one.
Remember above all the local planning guys have had to respond to a complaint - be nice and understanding they may well come down on your side. Generally I have found them to lack knowledge on helicopters and the planning laws. Tell them what the law is and be helpful, show them what you do and how long it takes to start up and go. Remind them a strimmer, chainsaw can go on all day !!!!!!!!
Drop me an e mail and i will give out my telephone number for those who want a chat

Happy New Year and have a safe one

[jerry712731]

Thanks for the Feedback

The planning officer has been in favour of the alternative site, a private airstrip, the noise officer has carried out tests and the planning officer recommended that a trial be carried out.
However, the commitee turned it down due the number of letters against the application.

I think the parish council is against the use of helicopters and has carried out a good campaign to stop the change of use.

The interesting thing is that some residents have written in in favour and clearly state that others are not against the use but will not write in.....

The idea of extending the curtilage is great, but I am sure the local resisdents and planning officer will work out what the outcome will be.

I myself have flown into a private site, closer to the village than the airstrip, and the people I spoke to were all in favour.

Maybe an appeal with a bit of shoe leather being used up knocking on doors to get support from those who are not against the use of A helicopter at the airstrip is the way to go....

[RDRickster]

Robbo Jock,

The AOPA is pretty much worthless when it comes to anything dealing with helicopters. I know of several operators who have asked them to create a division for rotorcraft; they just won't do it. Where were they when Heliports were threatened in New Hampshire? NOWHERE... they don't care about rotorcraft... period. If it were a fixed-wing landing strip, they'd have lawyers at your disposal.

In the U.S. there are a lot of options, and the situation is a bit different. Still, it is always a battle (mostly with local ordinance). I won't muddle jerry712731's initial question about U.K. operations on this thread though.

R2