The beginning of the end of small private airstrips

[photofly]

Didnt see anything is there regarding hangars and buldings though, are they still under federal authority or did that get changed?

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.

[Oldguystrtn2fly]

Didnt see anything is there regarding hangars and buldings though, are they still under federal authority or did that get changed?

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.

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.

[photofly]

I've not seen any federal regulation that requires anyone to build to any provincial standard; any idea where to look?

[jakeandelwood]

Most provincial building codes are nearly identical to the national code, just minor additions to suit the area, footing depths, snow loads, and rain screens etc.

[Oldguystrtn2fly]

I've not seen any federal regulation that requires anyone to build to any provincial standard; any idea where to look?

I am gonna check and see if I can locate where I read that.


Edit. Ok I have looked through all my screenshots that I compiled for my own little bruh ha ha with municipal government and I can not find where I read this building code clause. I re read the whitecourt thread and it is not in there and I wonder if it may have been linked info from the first thread that was deleted but I really can’t be certain. I apologize for pushing incorrect information and I noticed I did it in the WC thread as well. I stated that I believed that a municipality can maintain control over hangar development when they lease you a lot as opposed to when they sell you one and you have title. I believe there is a Supreme Court decision showing that the owner of the property still cannot impede aviation...although I don’t know how to link a court decision to back that up either so I guess spewing “facts” without any back up is my thing....have a great day

[photofly]

There was a recent case in Oshawa where the municipality got thoroughly spanked by the judge for trying to impose building regulations on a leaseholder.

[Oldguystrtn2fly]

Yes that’s the one. I think you linked it sometime ago with the same description.

[jakeandelwood]

Didnt see anything is there regarding hangars and buldings though, are they still under federal authority or did that get changed?

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.

So I can build an aircraft hangar in my backyard and the city can't do squat? I doubt that

[photofly]

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

[photofly]

Double post

[Oldguystrtn2fly]

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

[digits_]

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

[jakeandelwood]

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

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.

[RickertsRed]

So I tried reading the rules and regs but couldn’t decipher half the garble goop, so I’m looking for plain language here.

Is the following statement correct?

Today’s way of doing business for having a your own private strip is to do a public/municipal consult if your strip is:
1) located within a city or town
2) located within 4km of built up area/city or town/protected area
3) located within 30nm of a registered or certified aerodrome
And if your strip doesn’t meet any of those 3 then no consultation required?

Thx!

[KissPlusOne]

This sounds like a few too many "Karen"s got upset that the house they moved into 3 years ago is in the direct path of someone who's lived in the same house for 20 years' approach path.

Seriously, though, if someone starts a petition, or has an example of a letter to write to their MP, let me know, please.

30NM of another aerodrome??? That is pretty much impossible to find in any southern part of the country. From B.C. to Nova Scotia, the places with a dense population have aerodromes scattered regularly throughout.

It's slightly absurd to think that mowing a strip beside your fence line should require MORE regulations than there already are.

Again, if someone with just a bit more free time than me starts a petition, or drafts a letter, please message me so I can either sign it, or adapt it for my local MP.

[RickertsRed]

There are some sample letters floating around on this site. I seen them, just don’t have the time to find them right now

[Oldguystrtn2fly]

There were some exemptions listed where consultation was not required, for agricultural use as well as 30 movements of less a year, but those may have been in the original proposal. Not sure if they made it through to the actual. And were these made regulations or were they advisory....big difference. Also, what does consulation exactly mean....

[KissPlusOne]

Somehow I missed the entire 3 pages preceding my comment... And that they were almost all from 3 or 4 years ago... Oops!

[RickertsRed]

Yeah I revived an old thread because I’m planning on my own strip and was curious if one was to follow every letter of the law what he would have to do... or at least know which ones he’s breaking

[photofly]

I don't think it's very onerous. You write to your immediate neighbours, you write to the county, you write to any aerodrome operator within 30nm, wait six weeks, collect their comments, decide if you're going to change anything, and send a summary to the minister and to everyone you wrote to.