The very small community where I had grown up, had always had an airfield at the edge of town. The town edge grew closer to the airfield. We were very aware of the noise we created, and were diligent about no circuits (or aerobatics!), just go and come. But, the community will to prevent local aviation still grew. With threats of vandalism against my plane, it was time to leave the community where I had lived since age 3. My mom lives there to this day.
When I contemplated the purchase of my property, which was to have a runway, the community reaction was an element of my planning, and condition of my offer to purchase. I borrowed a 185 amphibian, with the loudest prop I could find, and beat up the property on the planned runway axis, but carefully avoiding flying over local houses. I then returned the plane, and drove back. I introduced myself to every neighour, and took responsibility for all the noise. I explained my intent to purchase and that I would come and go in my plane, but it was no where near as loud as what they had just heard. Aside from "please don't fly right over my house", there has never been an objection to the plane.
As I built my house, I hired some local trades, spent all construction costs in the community, and always paid my bills. It turned out that several of the trades were volunteer firefighters. It was not long before it was hinted that my flying a search over our local lake would be a real help. I joined the fire department, and for the last 21 years, I have probably flown on average a search a month. This became very well known in the community, and I seem to be "Airplane Jim" around here. Indeed, years ago, my aunt decided to pay me a surprise visit, but did not know exactly where I lived. The first person she asked in town gave her directions to "Jim with the plane".
The community is just a gathering of people who have chosen to be together, and accept what each other person brings to the community, both desirable, and not so much. I eagerly made not only myself, but my plane a member of the community, and it was accepted as more beneficial than annoying.
Now I have the Teal amphibian, I am again aware of its potential to annoy, as it is louder. I have pressed it into service for searches, and this year twice found a soon to be doomed boater bobbing in the lake for his life. The community likes that (I think the boaters did too, though they never commented about my effort on their behalf).
So the lesson is to do whatever is possible to make the plane a part of the community, whether looking for farmer's lost cattle, to hopping rides, to flying searches. Whatever you can do....
Less positively though we tried some years ago to reopen another strip and our cause was not helped by pilots from an airfield the other side of the county using our strip for PFLs.
This may be a stupid question, but private pilots rarely if ever practice PFLs unless forced, so did you try to make the strongest possible representations to the flying school which kept creating that nuisance? I would have kicked up a huge stink.
'.....private pilots rarely if ever practice PFLs unless forced...'
Not sure I'd agree with that - it's a fairly routine and interesting practice with several not so experienced pilots I fly with - there's always something to discuss, whether it's successful or not.
I would say however, having made the switch from commercial aviation to private GA in the last couple of years, and having flown with a couple of dozen private pilots from differing backgrounds, no-one has ever discussed emergency procedures (besides ditching and pax briefing) during pre-flight checks on a routine flight. Is it that difficult to spend a couple of minutes going through the more obscure emergencies? I've found myself getting casual....
After realising what was happening we tracked down the offending aircraft, GINFO is your friend, and contacted the club responsible. This brought an end to it, for which we thanked them, but the damage had been done and it was thrown back in our faces frequently.
Our counter argument that when established and marked on a chart, that other pilots would not fly below 1000' though our overhead so reducing traffic over houses was not believed.
The result was that the planning officer recommended that we could continue subject to some restrictions that we were quite happy with, but the council rejected this and we moved to another field .
The result was that the planning officer recommended that we could continue subject to some restrictions that we were quite happy with, but the council rejected this
Do you mean it failed in the planning committee?
That is very common.
Loads of planning applications, which do comply with planning policy, are passed by the planning officer (who has a degree in Town & Country Planning and knows he basically has to approve it unless it contravenes planning policy) and are then thrown out in the committee (most of whose members usually know little or nothing about planning law, and have never been to the site).
An appeal is the normal next stage and is completely routine for anybody who is serious.
The planning committee system tries to operate in a way which strongly discourages people from appealing, by making them thoroughly sick of what pretends to be a democratic process. The idea is that people walk out of the room with their head spinning and they immediately give up. For example you have 2 minutes to speak, against a stopwatch, and if you go 5 seconds over the 2 minutes (in mid sentence) the Chairman starts shouting at you so you cannot complete the sentence, and if you say the words they won't be heard. Been there, done that myself...
It is a quasi judicial process, so if e.g. one of the councillors turns out to have been phoning around the village the day before, soliciting people to turn up at the committee hearing and speak against your proposal, you can have him struck off, because he is showing that his mind was made up before he entered the room (which of course never happens). Now how do I know that? 
Unsuprisingly, a standard tactic is to (concurrently with filing the appeal) submit a planning application for the same thing but slightly modified so it is "less aggressive".
The council is then presented with a situation where they know that you will probably get both granted on appeal, and they will look daft because you will obviously choose the one which is more useful to you.
So they grant you the 2nd one, on the condition (which will only ever be agreed verbally) that you withdraw your appeal.
Any half competent planning consultant will be adept at this kind of stuff. But a really slick consultant will probably not let the application get to the committee, because everybody knows it's a waste of time. He will do a deal with the councillors, off the table.
Apologies if you were aware of this
My experiences are pretty much the same as PilotDAR. The difference is, private airstrips here are next to impossible, as Europe is slightly more densely populated than Canada and also have a very different attitude.
The poster who said he never had a problem, good to you. Here, flying and private pilots or let alone owners are regarded by many in power as insects, vermin or simply unworthy life. Since I have been flying again after my hiatus, I have had the good fortune to get everything on the agenda from murder threats to "well wishes" in the so far vain hope that I'd kill myself with that flying pest of mine..... The airports we fly from wish we'd go away and those which are for small planes have waiting lists for years before you even get outside parking.
GA in central Europe is truely at war with anti aviation people. Anyone who believes this not to be the case will probably fall into the same trap as one Neville Chamberlain who once thought there was peace to be in Europe, despite having been told the opposite. The aviation opponents will not be appeased, they want aviation to stop, to go away and not to bother them even by existence. We can do whatever we want, we can have the silent VTOL plane, they will still bitch unless we make them invisible as well.
Personally I hope the socialist movement so rampant in recent years will self destruct before it is too late and they pull us with it. Italy shows hopeful signs with the first tax lord having stepped down, the French are much less enthusiastic about their new president than they used to be after his taxation spree and others will follow. The question is, what about all the closet socialists who claim to be conservatives but in fact are to the left of Marx most of the time. Germany is supposed to have a conservative government, which is true in comparison to the marxist bunch who want to deplace them, but still to the left of center uncomfortably.
What is needed in Europe is a turn away from entitlement and socialist ideals towards a success based society, who will return to values lost after the end of the cold war. We now need to defend the ideals which made Europe a welcome destination for ex east block dissidents. We need to believe in Europe as a place where success is worthwile and achievable. We need legislation which helps us doing things and doesn't strangle us into passivity. We need visionaries who will defeat the doom and gloom sayers and the ultralefts if we want to have any future as a market economic society.
GA in Europe can't continue to fight in small groups, we need to get together and form a European lobby which has a good organisation, professional lobbyists and numbers to prove. AOPA US would never have the weight they do in the US if they were splinter groups in each country, they are strong because they have a national reach and the numbers to go with it. If European pilots would stand together instead of fighting their own little fights often even against each other, we'd see a very different power projection. People need to know that without GA, our airlines will need to recruit it's pilots elsewhere, our SAR organisations won't be able to do their job, we will be severely restricted in doing business if it were not for the biz jets which transport mostly essential personal to essential meetings and not Sun-b-movie stars as people believe. We need to make it clear to the population that flying could be more economical than even driving a car, if we are relieved of some of the legal drivel which has made our lives impossibly expensive over the years. People need to realize that the organs they wait for are flown by GA, not airliners or father xmas, that most of the people who fly their holiday jets have started in GA, not in the airliners they now fly.
And apart from that, if we wish to live in a free world where a normal guy can still drive his car, travel freely and exercise what ever hobbies he wishes, we will need to state our case with GA. GA is just one target for these people who wish to destroy much more than just us. Once GA has been banned or regulated into inexistence, their list goes on to a lot of things we value.
I believe that the next 2 years will be decisive for the continued existence of GA in Europe. If we loose now, we might want to read up on how people used to exercise their flying passions in places like the USSR or the GDR before the fall.
A friend of mine once said that it was his belief that the extent of personal freedom a society allows its citizens can easily be measured by the degree on how GA is existent in a country. I believe he's right. We should keep this in mind!
In northern Scotland, there are more strips now than when I restarted flying over 25 years ago. Several have got planning permission in the last 10 years. I hear one is now using an "Aircraft Storage Shed" instead of a "Hangar", on the advice of the Planning Officer.
Europe (and the uk) has to live with the fact that it is compact and has many authorities. The compact size I think, does not present a pressing need for air transportation like in north america. Canada and more so the US gov. understands the benefit of having a viable regional airport and subsidizes airport infrastructure and actually pays air carriers to service them. You can live in any little town and get a shuttle to one of major hubs.
The point is that the price of the land becomes moot when the government ensures its existence. If the European model was applied to north America there would be few airports - maybe a few grass strips.
I don't think there is much to be done other than to change the whole model of support. All the government s would have to come together and come up with something much better than than what you have now.
