Here we friggin go !

[piperboy84]

Let the games begin

4667

[Colibri49]

28 day rule? Friendly neighbours? Who's counting? Flexible start dates for each 365 day period?

[scifi]

Are we all invited to the Fly-B-Que...?
.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Better not agree to the meeting, as agreeing to a meeting on "the site of the development" would be admitting that a "development" has taken place (hint: if no "development" has taken place there may be no need for planning permission)?

[piperboy84]

The 28 day rule ain’t gonna work for me, I fly out of here once or twice a day when the weathers good. I’ve been looking at the planning website and there’s something about continued use for a period of 10 years may create some sort of grandfather rights. I’ll have to do more digging. It’ll be a bugger if they shut me down as a lot of folks from all over the UK get a lot of enjoyment out of the field with all types of equipment from parasails, microlight, gyros, helicopters and fixed wing for both business and pleasure. Plus the flyers bring a lot business into the cafe at the nature reserve next door that employs several local women with steady work which can be few and far between in rural areas in the winter. If there’s a way to get it sorted I’ll move mountains to get it done.

[airpolice]

Type up a letter from 30 years ago and fake the paper to look like an old council letterhead. Then do a scabby photocopy of it.

Produce that as your planning consent, secure in the knowledge that no local authority can realistically go back 30 years and find their copy of anything.

[ETOPS]

Under English law you would need a "Certificate of lawful use"

This looks like the Scottish version.

Certificates of lawful use or development (http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Built-Environment/planning/Appeals/whatwedo/planningandrelatedappeals/clud)

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Produce that as your planning consent, secure in the knowledge that no local authority can realistically go back 30 years and find their copy of anything.
You're taking a little bit of a risk, someone might have put that stuff onto microfiche (and might still have a working reader!). But yes, I did once ask council officers to search for some old plans, to be told, eventually, "they must have got lost in the 1936 fire". (There was, of course, no 1936 fire - this is simply officer speak for "sorry councillor, can't find them, I'm going back to my day job now".)

[Colibri49]

"continued use for a period of 10 years" has been used elsewhere in Scotland for sure and it might help if records could be produced by yourself and others, such as logbook entries proving that flights were made over the period. Once that has been established, you're then into "change of use" of the land and associated higher council tax rates.

[trevs99uk]

If the airstrip has been there for more than 10 years and has been used more than 28 days a year then and there has been no complaints then you can apply for continued use.
Speak to the Angus council planning officer.
You may have to prove this with log book entries and a visiting aircraft log..

[piperboy84]

"continued use for a period of 10 years" has been used elsewhere in Scotland for sure and it might help if records could be produced by yourself and others, such as logbook entries proving that flights were made over the period. Once that has been established, you're then into "change of use" of the land and associated higher council tax rates.

Why would there be council tax, money has never changed hands, I don’t run a business, I’ve never charged anyone for anything (never charged a landing fee). It’s basicaly a sporting club of one where I have covered all the maintenance cost by myself.

[First_Principal]

PB,

I'd be very careful what you post here in a public forum. No doubt every genuine aviator wishes you well in this, and will want to know what happens, but obviously the forum is also available to 'Angus Council' and anyone working for them.

FWIW; while I live in a different jurisdiction and cannot offer specific advice I will PM you separately to this post with a few comments that may be useful.

FP.

[Deltasierra010]

The 28 day rule ain’t gonna work for me, I fly out of here once or twice a day when the weathers good. I’ve been looking at the planning website and there’s something about continued use for a period of 10 years may create some sort of grandfather rights. I’ll have to do more digging. It’ll be a bugger if they shut me down as a lot of folks from all over the UK get a lot of enjoyment out of the field with all types of equipment from parasails, microlight, gyros, helicopters and fixed wing for both business and pleasure. Plus the flyers bring a lot business into the cafe at the nature reserve next door that employs several local women with steady work which can be few and far between in rural areas in the winter. If there’s a way to get it sorted I’ll move mountains to get it done.
You probably have got the right to continued use but you are going to have to prove it with documents and statements in your favour and if the locals really are friendly it will not be too demanding, contact the council and let them know you are preparing an application or they will chase you. However if you have just one local councillor or even worse one well heeled objector it can get very complicated and expensive.
Get planning advice, accompany your application with lots of evidence at the outset and with luck it will get passed by officers with delegated powers, local authorities want process non contentious issue quickly. The more publicity it gets the greater the risk of potential objectors coming to the surface, time your application to coincide with summer holidays when local nimbys are on holiday.
You probably will have to pay some rates on buildings and there will be limitations on flying activities attached.

[airpolice]

I don't agree that it has to be expensive just because the Local Authority might want to throw money at it. A well presented case can be argued (by you) in court without legal representation.

A case presented by you, to a Sheriff, without incurring costs, is just as valid as the same case argued by a Brief with no interest (other than getting paid) in the facts.

[Evanelpus]

Gaw blimey, when I saw that letter, I thought it was for the Guvnor!!

Shudder!

[piperboy84]

Gaw blimey, when I saw that letter, I thought it was for the Guvnor!!

Shudder!

That went way over my head?

Anyway, had a chin wag with the planner today, a thoroughly decent and professional chap and the upshot was we’re going to explore different avenues to keep everybody happy.

[Deltasierra010]

I don't agree that it has to be expensive just because the Local Authority might want to throw money at it. A well presented case can be argued (by you) in court without legal representation.

A case presented by you, to a Sheriff, without incurring costs, is just as valid as the same case argued by a Brief with no interest (other than getting paid) in the facts.

The local authority are not the problem, the planning officer might be very helpful, you can represent yourself but don't make mistakes or omit information. The original letter was probably prompted by some person enquiring about your planning status, as you are next to a nature reserve, it might be alleged that aircraft noise disturbs the breeding activity of newts, believe me that will cause problems.

You probably don't want to spend much cash on this because there is no money to be made and you can still go back to the 28 day rule, best of luck you will certainly find out who your friends are!.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

The local authority are not the problem
I have been the planning portfolio holder, and hence in charge of the planning enforcement service, when a complaint came in which really one would have preferred to ignore (for all sorts of reasons, including possibly some racism, which I won't go into). But it was reasonably clear that if the council didn't follow through the complaint exactly to the letter of the law we'd be taken to JR by the complainant, and the court (apart from being expensive) would then order the council to follow the letter of the law anyway.

So yes, sometimes the local authority are not themselves the cause of the problem, it's just that they've not really got any option but to investigate complaints and take action if a breach of planning law is found, even if the council thinks the public interest would be better served by ignoring the complaint.

[anchorhold]

I would not meet initially but initially write back politely saying you were aware this a 'development. My advice would be to get some professional advice from someone who specialises.

The ten year rule sounds interesting i will have to look that up for England, your not confusing that with adverse possession are you, although that is 12 years in England.

I would tread very carefully with them because planning enforcement the can become controlling, once you make a stand.

I had a long running battle over a site office (shipping container) on land I was in possesion of, yet as I pointed out people keep caravans, boats, horse boxes, etc on private residential land or agricultural. In the end the council wanted £750 from me and a further £750 for the Secretay of State to appeal! I was not happy about that. Then they used a HIAB to remove it and I haven't seen it again, so I we be taking them to the County Court.

All this change of use reminds me of when Jeremy Clarkson parked a lightning jet on his front law.

You could get planning advice for free from another borough council, you will have to dream up a location on their patch. Is there an association of airstrip owners, they might help.

One thing you could ask the council is before you arrange a meeting, could the council disclose the letter of complaint and a list of the aircraft types, colouring, markings and registrations, also do not let on you have a visitors log, if you have one. The other thing before the meeting get a copy of the deeds, because there may not be any restriction on the use of the land. To get a copy of your deeds online in England is £4.00

Good luck and keep us posted.

P.S. Just one other thing, I tried to look for your strip through your postcode on google earth, and I am guessing it is two fields north of a loch roughly 08/26 with two buildings. Bit of caution here, if they were put up as agricultural buldings, planning make take issue. I had a friend who had this issuebut he argued that he only needed them for agricultural for relatively short season, for storing produce, at othe tome he might shelter his aircraft there. Going back to google earth and this will either support your case or destroy it if you are claiming the ten year rule, there is a function in google earth click on the top right hand bar 'VIEW' 'HISTORICAL' and by moving the sliding bar from the most recent image back to 2007, which gives you eleven years, as I would say that too looks like a landing strip, tell me I'm not wrong. Your planning officer will do this. You might need a professional pilot as a witness to state on the balance of probabilities both images look like an airstrip. Also if this strip has been used regularly, I can think of a very senior CAAFU examiner who has been flying in the area for years, infact I did my CPL GFT with him routing via Forfar, he would be the ideal witness, I can PM his name if you have not guessed.

[maxred]

Why would there be council tax, money has never changed hands, I don’t run a business, I’ve never charged anyone for anything (never charged a landing fee). It’s basicaly a sporting club of one where I have covered all the maintenance cost by myself.

PB, to echo what others have hinted. Watch what you post. I would take advice also. Rates is your major issue.

[Deltasierra010]

Some posters have suggested that you try to take the p??s and try to avoid the rules, don't do that, instead of a friendly planning officer you will get a really miserable enforcement officer, play it straight.
In England it would be a Certificate of lawfull use, present your application as best you can, when they accept it as a valid application it will be advertised to neighbours, local parish councils, environment agency, highways and probably other. They will all have a limited time to make comments, you can read these comments either online or at the council offices before the application is determined, if you have a lot of adverse comment, ask to put the decision back a month and provide extra evidence to counter the comment. So far it would have cost you very little, if you get refused and appeal it will cost a great deal.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

instead of a friendly planning officer you will get a really miserable enforcement officer
Enforcement officers are always really miserable, it goes with the job function - you have to spend all day talking to people who don't want to see you. Which in turn, surprise surprise, means that it's not easy to hire good ones, and in fact not easy to hire any at all.

[Right Hand Thread]

A few lessons to be learned here.

https://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=105239&hilit=Planning

Basically, stop broadcasting everything on the internet and seek professional advice from the start.

[artschool]

you need to speak to a planning consultant.

signed witness statements may be the way to go to prove 10 years use.

[POBJOY]

PB84 Golden Rule

As alluded in the post's the 'Council' have to be seen to follow up complaints or observations from third parties.

They frequently encourage you to 'Just make an application old boy' which may be asked for in a very friendly way, but it merely puts you at risk on two counts.
A:- it presumes YOU NEED to make an application (when in fact you do not), and B:- What do you do when the application is refused (which is entirely likely) even if the actual planning officer recommends approval.
It only needs a couple of switched on locals to bombard the Council with complaints, or the threat of a judicial review, and your 'friendly' planning officer suddenly becomes your executioner.
Your initial action should be to DO NOTHING,ADMIT NOTHING, and certainly not to commit anything to paper or e-mail or even telephone conversation.
The Council do not like having to take enforcement action as it puts them on the back foot as to what they are trying to enforce against, and they frequently get it wrong in unusual cases.
Also there may be different rules in Scotland or even local bylaws.

If you have an 'off the record' chat with the planning officer do not say anything that may harm your case (they are not allowed to record conversations anyway) and merely ask what action they propose to take. This will at least forewarn you on what action you need to prepare for.

There are planning consultants out there who can advise, but local knowledge is always useful. I would suggest a call to the LAA at Turnweston would be in order as they are an organisation that has a lot of dealings with 'strips' so they will know the best people in your area to advise you.
Good Luck and remember 'Loose Lips Sinks Ships'

PM me if you want I have been down this route more than once so may be able to 'point you' in a positive direction. !!!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

There are planning consultants out there who can advise, but local knowledge is always useful.

Planning consultants have considerably more value if they know the local planning policies and the local planning officers. So choose a local one.

[artschool]

Planning consultants have considerably more value if they know the local planning policies and the local planning officers. So choose a local one.

totally agree. also the one man band operators are often just as good as the nationals.

[TractorBoy]

If you can't use it as a landing strip then sell the land to some members of the travelling community.

[airpolice]

If you can't use it as a landing strip then sell the land to some members of the travelling community.

You mean rent it, surely.

[rogcal]

If you kept an airfield log which shows entries covering more than 10 years then you're in with a chance. I did and that led to my being granted a Cert of Lawful use which suited me fine and comes with no conditions. The down side was that a jobsworth at the council asked the Valuation Office (VO) to set a rateable value on the strip but after some dialogue with the VO they declined to do so. Result.

[Deltasierra010]

You mean rent it, surely.
Tractor Boy has obviously has some experience of travelers, definitely sell, and move a long way away because all the locals are going to hate you. There is a rumor that there are good travelers, but residents who live close to one of their "no go area" sites tell a different story.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

There is a rumor that there are good travelers
They will be like "good politicians", "good drivers", "good managers", "good typography", "good Tories" ect ect - they probably do exist, but you never notice them. Because why would you?

[cats_five]

<snip>
if you are claiming the ten year rule, there is a function in google earth click on the top right hand bar 'VIEW' 'HISTORICAL' and by moving the sliding bar from the most recent image back to 2007, which gives you eleven years, as I would say that too looks like a landing strip
<snip>

I don't think the 2007 image does look like a landing strip. There are three obvious hedges plus gates in it, which have vanished by the time of the 2011 photo where it also shows signs of wear along the appropriate orientation. If I was looking for a field to land a glider in I'd have no hesitation with the 2011 onwards appearance, but not with the hedges. The distance between the west-most & centre hedges is 180m, which while it's possible to squeeze the right kind of glider in is pretty tight.

[GK430]

What about consulting with Flying Farmers?

[Crash one]

I don't think the 2007 image does look like a landing strip. There are three obvious hedges plus gates in it, which have vanished by the time of the 2011 photo where it also shows signs of wear along the appropriate orientation. If I was looking for a field to land a glider in I'd have no hesitation with the 2011 onwards appearance, but not with the hedges. The distance between the west-most & centre hedges is 180m, which while it's possible to squeeze the right kind of glider in is pretty tight.

Those "hedges" we're never hedges, they were temporary fences for grazing, when I flew in there in 07/08? He was using it in any direction depending on wind, it's still used for grazing today as required.
no wonder he bought a Maul.

[misterling]

Hi Piperboy.

What is the state of play with your strip? I was hoping to pop in with the R22 sometime in the next week or two for a cup of tea and a sticky bun at Murton.
Can we stillll land there or is the strip closed?

Either way i hope things work out ok.

Regards.

Martin

[nkt2000]

Hi PIperboy
i présumé it was you refuelling at Dundee this afternoon. I was going to intro myself but was busy preflighting OF. Am doing my IMC rating. By the time I got finished you were off again. Great day for flying