Private air strip..... yes or no???

Tom

"Farlang" is Thai for 'white'.

Big John


On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 02:02:32 -0500, Tom Fleischman
wrote:

What is a Farlang, anyway?

He certainly CAN build a runway only on his property and still
operate an aircraft from it.

This depends on state and local regulations.

My town specifically regulates "airports", and as I read the zoning
ordinance a private runway qualifies as an airport.

Where is the poster from?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

I would like to think it is being fair for me to expect no
planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off, landing
or pattern flying.

The applicable federal regulations don't support that
expectation. They permit the pilot to come closer when
landing or taking off. A

It's even worse than that, from the neighbor's point of view. The
neighbor can't build a structure or allow a tree to grow to a height
that obstructs the takeoff.

At Plum Island airport in Newburyport MA, the previous operator owned
the east end of the runway. When a new operator was hired, he (the
eastie) built a raggedy pile on his own bit of runway. I thought it
was rather funny, but the courts didn't, and he had to remove the
pile.



all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:27:32 GMT, EDR wrote:

Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
line with the runway.

The FAA can and probably will stop him.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

In article , Ron Natalie
wrote:

"Newps" wrote in message
news:FWtWb.148128$U%5.676158@attbi_s03...


Not quite true.
Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
line with the runway.

Which doesn't affect what I said one iota.

Also the premise is true. You can't erect a tower with impunity either.
In addition to the local land use issues, towers that tall would require
FAA notification before they are constructed.

Only if it to be 250 or more feet AGL.

It depends on the county, talk to the county planner. Many places it
depends on how far you are from the closest land that is zoned residential.


Mike
MU-2


.."just an average Farlang..." wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@107 6505681.nulluser.com...
Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
be
allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property. I know
there
are many factors that are not presently known in this scenario but I
can
try to input as much as I know.

My neighbor owns land that is 2600 feet wide. The elevation is about
3000
feet and the hottest temperature is 91 degrees in the summer. The land
is
located in Idaho. The prevailing winds position the optimal take off
direction to be directly over my house about 1500 feet from the
property
line. I LOVE airplanes! I worked for Boeing (Lazy B) for the last
fifteen
years. I worked at Cessna in Witchita before that. I stop to watch
planes
take off and land. I LOVE PLANES!!! But what I don't love is buying 500
acres to finally get some peace and quiet and then having some loud
plane
buzz my house at will. The person wanting to put in the runway has
money
to build a 3 floor nice house so I expect they will want to be
socialites
and invite all their friends to fly in for a barbacue on the weekend.

I talked to planning and zoning and they don't even know what
prospective
planes will be flown there i.e. ultralites or larger planes that
require
longer runways. I would like to think it is being fair for me to
expect no
planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off, landing
or
pattern flying. I bought my land and paid for the use of each and every
acre. If by putting in a runway on the edge of my property that means
they
are helping themselves to a sort of "easement" flying a hundred feet
or so
over my land that doesn't seem at all fair. I may wish to build a barn,
corral animals (which might go crazy) penned up with planes buzzing
over
them.

Can I get some ideas on what is realistic?

I don't even know what a common length of runway is but a friend of
mine
told me using generic table calculations that a fully loaded small
plane
on a hot day could very well need a long take off and after lift
off ....
how long a distance til that plane gets to minimal required elevation?


Yesterday I took a flying lesson with a chief piot and he told me a
small plane can lift off after about a thousand feet of runway and
then the maximum climb would be about 500 feet per minute. He thought
for a plane to stay the necessaary elevation over my property the
pilot is required a total of no less than 4000 feet. The runway will
be a dirt strip which also requires more distance.

any comments would be appreciated

In article , G.R. Patterson III
wrote:

EDR wrote:
Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
line with the runway.

I would not care to be the defense lawyer if his neighbor crashes due to the
tower and it comes out that the only reason he built it was to interfere with
airplanes.

There are no federal protections afforded to private airstrips.
Ten to fifteen years ago, outside Marysville OH, Honda knowingly built
a private communications tower off the end of a private strip new their
assembly plant. There was no recourse for the airstip owner.

No sniveling when you don't get the answer you wanted.

Mike
MU-2
"just an average Farlang..." wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.08aca6e0d6e6c76ad4fd7c32b7325054@107 6508540.nulluser.com...
Jim wrote:

Huh? You LOVE planes! He's not talking about building the next
O'Hare in
your back yard. On the average if he flew once or twice a week
would that
upset you? I'd say that's more of a realistic expectation. Maybe
he'd even
give you a ride.

Talk to your local zoning board. Like everything else in this
country,
landowners have certain rights, until some asshole complains.
--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply

I was hoping for a more mature newsgroup. A more accurate saying would
be,"We all have rights but not the right to impose on other's rights".

So far I can only perceive a "redneck" mentality from the replies. You
people question if "I" love airplanes but I question if "YOU" love
airplanes because if you did you would be concerned to help preserve
this instead of thinking you can do anything you please. I think I
already commented that I didn't know the extent of what the other
landowner intended to do. One flight one day of the month would be
peachy. One flight every day, every hour, a crop dusting business ran
out of the home or whatever would be extreme. This is not a question
of pilots fighting for their rights because it is clear there is not
enough land in this example to not violate the rights of others.

While I understand and share your desire for peace and quiet, it is not a
"right" and does not have legal protection. If you really have 500 acres
and want peace and quiet, then why is your house on the edge of the
property?

Mike
MU-2

"just an average Farlang..." wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.e280925b7ce137109f1ad739f078cbd4@107 6524004.nulluser.com...
Peter,

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out you trying to turn
this into a personal attack. It just might help (and I know this isn't
the first time you heard this) to re-read my initial post. I have a
basic concern of my rights being violated. I don't care what any
landowner or aircraft pilot does if his "rights" don't impose on "my"
rights. I said it once before I wasn't looking for sympathy here. I
know people who fly airplanes are biased to those feelings. It may
surprise you to realize though as one person stated that pilots must
act responsibly to preserve their interests. Just because you got a
shiny plane out there and love it to death doesn't mean everyone else
feels the same as you all the time. Keep in mind I really like to see
planes take off and land. I would like to watch it up close, but other
times it is not appropriate. You want an exmple you can understand?
Maybe you have a loud stereo in your living room. Most people enjoy
music and sometimes like to turn up the volume. It is unlikely you
have a stereo in your bedroom and if you did it would likely not be on
high volume. If you ponder that concept it gets back to the idea of
being responsible.

There is no denying I am overly-concerned and there is great reason to
be. This is just the way things are Peter that nowdays people do
things like this where they get approved for an airstrip and the idea
is it will be kinda cool and won't bother anyone but after all is said
and done it gets out of control and turns into something extreme.

Try to keep your composure and not accuse me of things like
understanding prevailing winds Peter when you have no clue of whether
I know this or not. You are free to question me but when you just
start spewing off you should be careful because you certainly have no
idea and just making blind accusations.

Cub Driver wrote:
He certainly CAN build a runway only on his property and still
operate an aircraft from it.


This depends on state and local regulations.

My town specifically regulates "airports", and as I read the zoning
ordinance a private runway qualifies as an airport.

Where is the poster from?

Not a city. He own 500 acres.