Nobody’s authority over anything has changed. All that happened is TC instituted a process for public consultation before building or enlarging an aerodrome.
Municipal building and zoning codes still don’t apply to runways or aircraft hangars.
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Nobody’s authority over anything has changed. All that happened is TC instituted a process for public consultation before building or enlarging an aerodrome.
Actually I think they recently, in the last two years or so, changed the rule to be that you must now build to the provincial building and fire codes, rather than the previous national building code. But to be clear this is still a TC federal regulation that can only be enforced by TC. Just because the code to follow is the provincial one, that doesn’t mean that the municipal enforcement arm can enforce it. I am going off memory here a bit so please feel free to look this up In depth.
I am gonna check and see if I can locate where I read that.
So I can build an aircraft hangar in my backyard and the city can't do squat? I doubt that
photofly wrote: ↑Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:11 am
Here’s a recent summary document from a respected law firm:
http://www.h-a-c.ca/The_Federal_Aeronau ... a_2018.pdf
Oldguystrtn2fly wrote: ↑Tue Oct 16, 2018 7:39 amphotofly wrote: ↑Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:11 am
Here’s a recent summary document from a respected law firm:
http://www.h-a-c.ca/The_Federal_Aeronau ... a_2018.pdf
Great link photofly, thank you
At least half the hangars at my airport don't even house aircraft, they are all rented out to the hot rod and gearhead crowd.photofly wrote: ↑Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:11 am Since you can’t put an aerodrome in a built up area (only a certificated airport), a court would likely say that your putative ״hangar” isn’t really anything to do with aviation and enforce the city’s jurisdiction and zoning laws.
On the other hand, if you could get the federal government to give you an airport operating certificate for your (tiny) runway and hangar, then yes, you could tell the city to go lose themselves. Thats exactly what the GTAA did to Mississauga city council.
Judges are not stupid and known what’s what:
Seguin (Township) v. Bak: A cottage owner tried to claim his water side structure was a “hangar” for a float plane but the court said it wasn’t, because he didn’t hold a pilot licence and had never put a plane in it. The court found he was attempting to subvert local building regulations and found against him.
Here’s a recent summary document from a respected law firm:
http://www.h-a-c.ca/The_Federal_Aeronau ... a_2018.pdf