Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1655829
PaulSS wrote:Are you just going to chuck in that grenade and walk away or are you going to give us the benefit of your wisdom? I'm sure there's a lot of us who would like to learn.


Agree. I'm neither obsessed by the rule nor, I hope, a victim of naivety. I'm simply trying to understand the law based - in this case - on what appear to be confusing and apparently contradictory analyses from the BHA and the House of Commons Library.

Very much looking forward to being guided by a greater and less naive authority.
By proteus
#1655837
I would guess the Farmer is referring to the 28 day rule only being applied if someone is counting / monitoring to complain. You can operate however often you like provided you are fairly open about it and after a period of time could then apply for a certificate for lawful use.
#1655839
proteus wrote:I would guess the Farmer is referring to the 28 day rule only being applied if someone is counting / monitoring to complain. You can operate however often you like provided you are fairly open about it and after a period of time could then apply for a certificate for lawful use.


10 years.

However you can not use the land as often as you like as that would be a breach of planning regulations.

That in practise it doesn't really matter unless someone complains is a pragmatic view.

Bit like driving 55 in a 50 Zone.

Neither driving nor operating on land beyond the limit is not legal.

@TheFarmer - I would be interested to know here or by PM what our misunderstanding is.
#1655842
Gustosomerset wrote:
PaulSS wrote:Are you just going to chuck in that grenade and walk away or are you going to give us the benefit of your wisdom? I'm sure there's a lot of us who would like to learn.


Agree. I'm neither obsessed by the rule nor, I hope, a victim of naivety. I'm simply trying to understand the law based - in this case - on what appear to be confusing and apparently contradictory analyses from the BHA and the House of Commons Library.

Very much looking forward to being guided by a greater and less naive authority.


As I understand it, the inference is that using your property for your sole use and enjoyment, without implementation of material change does not constitute a change of use and hence will not trigger Permitted Development or Planning Permission requirements - and it is those to which the 28 day exemption refers to.

A helicopter, it could be argued, is able to take off or land on pretty much any surface as could (slightly harder here, given this forum's collective knowledge of aerodynamics and aircraft performance) a conventional aircraft use a piece of (unimproved) land for the same.

Therefore if you own almost anything such as Mountain bikes, quad bikes, helicopter, etc. etc. solely for your own and immediate friends and family's personal use and enjoyment, and do not make material change to the property, it will not require change of use to be applied for (or exempted from) to enjoy unrestricted use within (the hard bit to define) the property curtilage.

However, causing excessive noise, privacy intrusion, or otherwise adversly affecting neighbours would come under different consideration of course.
#1656123
Well, in the absence of greater wisdom here's what I understand so far:

1. Landing an aircraft in your own garden - in planning terms your 'domestic curtilage' (providing it is large enough) does not require planning consent providing it is for your own private use, despite the confused wording of both authorities quoted above. There is no legal distinction made between rotary or fixed wing aircraft from a legal point of view although - obviously - rotary is more likely.
2. Landing an aircraft in a field or other land that you own does not require a change of use planning consent so long as movements are restricted to no more than 28 days a year and use remains private. The number of movements is not limited. I now believe that this rule applies to all the land you own under a single title as a whole i.e. not 'per field' as I had previously understood.
3. Landing an aircraft in a field or other land that you own does require a change of use planning consent if movements are to be for more than 28 days a year, use is anything other than private or any structural additions are to be made (concrete pads, hangars, etc) in connection with the use.

Obviously there are other legal considerations - aviation law, noise abatement, etc - this is just a summary from a planning perspective (about which I know much more than The Farmer naively assumes, though not as much as I would like to on this specific topic).

Of course, in practice, all of this only becomes relevant if someone chooses to apply the law. The best approach, as ever, is to avoid giving anyone a reason to do that in the first place.
PaulSS liked this