The FAA issued Airport Compliance Manual (ACM) Order 5190.6B (link to entire Order web page) last year. In the details, the FAA has placed airparks (both existing and future) with through-the-fence (TTF) agreements or on premise at publicly-funded or granted airports squarely in its cross-hairs.

ACM 5190.6B Chapter 20, Section 4A, is a horrific statement, “Any residential use existing on the airport or any residential use granting “through-the-fence” access is an incompatible land use.” The FAA is painting the subject with the broadest possible brush.

Same Chapter, Section 3B, “The likelihood that residents of an airpark will seek restrictions on the use of the airport for the benefit of their residential use is very high, whether or not they own aircraft.” The FAA offers no evidence from existing federally-funded airports with airparks that substantiate this assertion.

Chapter 12 has further language pertaining to TTF and incompatible land use, including a response to Sporty’s Pilot Shop owner Hal Shevers in his attempt to encourage the FAA to promote TTF and airparks as a way to save airports across the country. As you might imagine, he was rebuffed.

The federal docket for comments on the ACM is open until March 31, 2010. Now is the time to make your voice heard. Download chapters 12 and 20 or the entire ACM (22MB PDF) and post your comments at this page at regulations.gov by clicking on the top Submit a Comment link (next to the original FAA notice dated 10/7/2009). Should you think this issue does not apply to you, think again. For the FAA to cavalierly state residential use near an airport is an incompatible land use (with no regard to circumstance and no apparent flexibility) is beyond the scope of rational thought.

The use of an “Air Avigation Easement” can make sure the space through which you must fly for a pattern at your residential airpark remains open, free of obstructions and legalalities.

Obtaining such an agreement can make a big difference in the future feasibility of an airpark. If, for example, your airpark is currently out in a rural area, such an agreement can easily keep any opponents from destroying what you have developed by building next door to you and then trying to cause problems because of planes flying over that property.

Read the full story

In 1989, the FAA issued a notice concerning through the fence operations, explaining how they are to be treated and the manner in which they should be considered. Although the circular is aimed at airports which have received federal grants or expect to receive them in the future, the comments are still valid and can be of value to anyone looking at such possibilities.

Many state agencies fail to take into account the differences between public and private airports in regard to such through the fence operations and as a result private airpark operators sometimes have a hard time explaining the issue adequately.

The FAA circular, order 5190.6A, is reprinted in its entirety:

Read the full story

Harvey Browne wrote to us asking…

We are in the process of creating a “Meadowmist Property Owners Association” and were wondering if you had any copies of by-laws for such organizations?
Best Regards,
Harvey

We sure do. You can check them out in our CC&Rs area of the Living With Your Plane website. If anyone associated with an airpark would like to offer up information for this section, please email us.

The ongoing question of "thru-the-fence" operations continues and recently we heard from a Colorado individual who received a negative letter from the FAA in the Northwest Region. Brain Krahmer’s letter follows along with the FAA’s letter. We also have included an FAA circular from 1989 relating to such operations.

It seems obvious that different FAA regions and local offices read and interpret the material in different ways and hopefully we can get an FAA-wide clarification on the issue. We know of several thru-the-fence projects that have been developed on public airports which have received FAA funding. The latest of which we are aware is Sandy’s Farm at the Clermont County Airport in Batavia, Ohio.

Here’s Krahmer’s letter:

Read the full story

Recently a subscriber asked about the limitations on hangars in his community, particularly those larger than 2,000 square feet.

Recently we got responses from different parts of the country – California and Washington State.

Read the full story

Here’s an avigation easement developed for Hidden Valley Airpark in Texas. Preparing such an easement for an airpark is important protection particularly if such agreements can be reached with those under the airpark flight patterns.

Read the full story

Some time ago we added an item to help airparks make sure they provided secure systems for planes and homes. We explained that we feared in the nation’s current emphasis on security and national worry of all things aviation, sooner or later someone would call for the TSA to start requiring security at private and residential airparks.
Read the full story

To amend title 49, United States Code, to enhance security at general aviation airports in the United States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Read the full story

One of the major issues that continually comes up in discussions about residential airparks is how a homeowners association or an airpark developer enforces the covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) that have been established.

The violations of the CC&Rs can be extremely minor or they can be dramatic.
Read the full story