No; that’s not correct.
If you operate inside the 28 day rule they can’t stop you. That is what that rule means. It provides for an allowance on the “change of use” prohibition, basically. The real issue is that everybody who flies for real wants to fly more than once a month so the name of the game is to exceed that allowance – which is also lawful – and eventually get a statement of lawful use based on the actual usage, so you do have to keep a low profile, discourage visitors, etc, for the 10 years.
Garden sheds, greenhouses, etc are within permitted development rights, which vary. In an AONB or a national park (where I happen to live) you are allowed 10 cubic metres. So we have a 9.9 cubic metre shed. Elsewhere you could fill your entire garden with sheds, subject to a max height etc etc.
As regards haggling with the council, nobody serious actually does that. That game is for plebs 
If you actually want something, you (a) make sure it doesn’t breach planning policy (most normal things don’t) (b) apply for Planning (c) if refused you engage a planning consultant (d) if he cannot “sort it” you appeal to the planning inspector, and he prob90 will grant it unless it contravenes planning policy (e) if that fails and you have 10-20k you appeal to the department of environment. You have to be a mixture of hard-nosed and cunning, like doing a deal with immediate neighbours to mutually support each other’s planning applications – a tactic which works because a single supportive letter effectively demolishes 100 objections.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
from Bergamo to somewhere like Luxembourg
Cannot be Luxembourg because it is closed from 2200-0500.
what_next wrote:
Cannot be Luxembourg because it is closed from 2200-0500.
I’ll have to check next time I see him in the nightshifts. Also possible to further away, Liege or Belgium someplace.
(Actually, I don’t see him on recent flightradar anymore, maybe they changed it now. Last time I heard him was in July before I went abroad.)
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Also possible to further away, Liege or Belgium someplace.
Liege, Brussels, Hahn, Köln-Bonn would be candidates. But anyway, I can – to a point – understand what those Swiss citizens complain about. Our nearest (and only) neighbor is a complex of hospitals with two helicopter landing platforms. Rescue operations are 24/7, weather permitting. I am absolutely not aviation noise sensitive, but when I have an early departure and must get up at 4:30 in the morning, being waken up every hour by an helicopter overflying one’s house at around 100ft (luckily there are some tall trees, otherwise he would go lower than that) can be a bit of a nuisance. Luckily they stopped operating UH-1Ds some years ago because you could hear them almost 10 minutes before they actually landed, thereby shaking all the apples from the trees.
Friend of mine sais it was an AN12 destination Liege. Apparently not a daily trip anymore. I never heard it normally (I live 2.5 km from the ZRH observation post) even with open window and when I was on duty, I’d miss it if I did not watch the radar anyhow. The sound was distinct, but much fainter than any passing car. Simply, I find it amazing that there are people who will go bonkers over something like that.
Rescue ops, well, helos are noisy. I remember vividly there were anti noise folks who wanted to include air rescue (both jet and helo) in the night ban, thankfully they never prevailed. I suppose they would have been the first to shout loud if one of their loved ones would die because we can’t do air rescue anymore…
I just wonder why no serious considerations are given to stuff like closing down roads at night due to noise, probably because everyone uses them. So why close down a multi billion dollar infrastructure? Yes, I live very close to an airport but I moved there because I work there and because I like the short commute. Can’t have everything. Like it quiet? Move.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I just wonder why no serious considerations are given to stuff like closing down roads at night due to noise,…
They don’t close them down completely but in many places there are lower speed limits at night, which is already better than nothing.
I think the best solution for noise is to build busy GA airports in industrial areas. In the daytime its noisy in the area anyway, and at night few people are around. Another reason why owning airport land is properly within government scope – the extra money paid for airport land in an industrial area is an investment in rural quiet. Plus the airport is closer to where people have to go.
As for people complaining about less busy airports in residential settings, a little noise by others should be accepted. Silence wasn’t guaranteed to anybody, and I think those who expect silence in a residential area should get over themselves, or move away from people entirely.
I just met a guy last weekend that owns his own 700-meter strip. He can park his plane right next to the kitchen window. It is a strip in the UK, grass, actually 2 strips of which one is 700 meter and the other shorter and also lights for night landing. He seems to enjoy it a lot and sees no problem with it. Does not seem to get complaints, but then again … he lives in the country side.
