SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Legal advice, government taking of property, more info on page two
Page 1 2 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Legal advice, government taking of property, more info on page two Login/Join 
Member
posted
I, along with several people in my neigborhood, just received a letter that was, by design, very short on facts.

This letter talks about vertical obstructions that may pose a threat to the airport to our east. I don't know why they didn't say trees.

They plan on having an informational meeting to talk about options for the safety and continued operation of the airport. Before this meeting I would like to know, from other sources, what my rights are in this case. Can they take these trees without payment? Many of these are between 100 and 200 foot tall Red and White Pines. Thanks in advance.

Jim

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Pal,
 
Posts: 1341 | Location: Northern Michigan | Registered: September 08, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
The Unmanned Writer
Picture of LS1 GTO
posted Hide Post
Welcome to the world of FAA.

Short answer is they can ether force you to remove them or remove them for you (and possibly pass along the costs).

Long answer - appeal and ask them to provide the reference (a FAR?). Read up on it and determine if they are correct in their assessment.

There is a certain, conical, distance (I think that's the correct terminology) which must be free from obstructions to main and cross-wind runways and the FAA owns that airspace which the obstructions may be obstructing.






Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.



"If dogs don't go to Heaven, I want to go where they go" Will Rogers

The definition of the words we used, carry a meaning of their own...



 
Posts: 14220 | Location: It was Lat: 33.xxxx Lon: 44.xxxx now it's CA :( | Registered: March 22, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
AOPA may have good resources to help you with this. The EAA may as well.
 
Posts: 2381 | Registered: October 24, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Doing my best to shape
America's youth
Picture of MooneyP226
posted Hide Post
Just happened in my town.

Landowners not happy, but they did not have to pay removal costs. They tried to block it but were not successful. Opened up the back of an entire neighborhood to flight noise. Took down a lot of trees in a certified wildlife habitat too.

Basic attitude around here was "airport was here before you were born..."

I hope it works out better for you than them.




Clarior Hinc Honos

BSA Dad, Cheer Dad
 
Posts: 1624 | Location: on the 42nd parallel  | Registered: November 19, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Smarter than the
average bear
posted Hide Post
Rusty, non-practicing attorney here, but in general the government cannot take your property without paying. I don't know about any special rules for FAA, but when they take property for roads, etc., they have to pay fair market value. The litigation is generally about what that value is-they tend to want to underpay.
 
Posts: 3563 | Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana | Registered: June 20, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
blame canada
Picture of AKSuperDually
posted Hide Post
Timber has a value.

Look to your applicable city/county codes, the condemnation of your trees may be covered in existing code.

It certainly seems reasonable that a government entity could condemn trees that pose a threat to public safety (which it sounds like the airport feels that they do). Are they talking about removing the trees completely, or just trimming some height off of them?

If they feel that they are justified in removing the whole tree....then you should be compensated for the trees and any losses associated or affects on value and livability of your property by their loss.

You may have to find an arborist or timber appraiser to value the trees they intend on removing/trimming.

I really see no reason to fight removal of a threat to aircraft safety, but you certainly should be compensated for any damages the removal causes you.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The trouble with our Liberal friends...is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan, 1964
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Arguing with some people is like playing chess with a pigeon. It doesn't matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon will just take a shit on the board, strut around knocking over all the pieces and act like it won.. and in some cases it will insult you at the same time." DevlDogs55, 2014 Big Grin
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

www.rikrlandvs.com
 
Posts: 14001 | Location: On the mouth of the great Kenai River | Registered: June 24, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
timber has a value.


Get someone to give you an estimate on home much the timber is worth.

Get pictures.
 
Posts: 7163 | Registered: April 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
The state took 4 and 1/2 trees down in my front yard. I have owned this property for 46 years.
Somebody puts a large grain elevator in down the road a piece and they filed a complaint saying their truckers going in and out of there cannot see far enough down the road because of the trees in my yard. They were 30-45 ft tall. They have a mound of dirt and stone on the other side of their driveway that is still there, but that keeps them from seeing down the other way.

So, the short answer now, is YES they can take your trees down. At least they did not make me pay to have them cut or hauled away.(they were Austrian white pine)


NRA Life Endowment member
Tri-State Gun collectors Life Member
 
Posts: 2794 | Location: Ohio | Registered: December 18, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Yes, Timber has a value. The value is subject to several influences, just as a home or vehichle. If you can determine the trees have a historical or some other tangential value, then do it. As an example -

Years ago, the county wanted part of my parents land for an easement to a new cell tower. We fought it, but ultimately lost. They agreed to pay $400 per tree that had to be removed. There were only 5 trees. We argued that the trees had historical significance, as they were the last remaining trees from a line of trees planted along an old road that no longer existed. In the end, we were paid $17,000 per tree
 
Posts: 1150 | Registered: October 05, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Ammoholic
posted Hide Post
As a pilot, I am not a fan of obstructions growing into the arrival and departure corridors, whether they are trees or high rises.

Doesn't seem fair to take someone's property without warning and compensation though. I guess in a perfect world, there would be easements on all properties in arrival and departure corridors specifying any height limits for buildings or trees. At the time the airport was built, someone (the airport authority, the FAA, or ?) could have paid the then owners of the properties for those easements and any later purchasers would know what they were getting into. Properties in the vicinity of our local airport have avigation easements. Basically, any potential buyer is made aware up front that there is and will be noise from the County Airport and buyers will have to deal with it. I don't know if they have anything similar for arrival and departure corridors though...

AOPA and EAA are resources on this kind of stuff, but I don't know how helpful they would be to your side of the argument. What the heck, any information you can get ought to be beneficial, even if their sympathies aren't on your side.

Good luck! I hope that something can be worked out that works for you, your neighbors, and the airport.
 
Posts: 7183 | Location: Lost, but making time. | Registered: February 23, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of jcsabolt2
posted Hide Post
Unless you sit on top of a hill in the approach or near the end of the runway, it shouldn't be an issue. Force them to mark EVERY single tree that needs to be trimmed or removed. Do not accept a blanket area. Also ask for a detailed aerial map showing all the imaginary surfaces. With today's GIS technology this is stupid simple to do and they can tell you EXACTLY what is penetrating the surface and by how much.

If you have an iPhone download the APP Airfield Mgmt, after its installed click on the middle button "Surfaces-USAF". This will educate you about the imaginary airfield surfaces.

However, unless they have an easement on your property, they CANNOT touch it, period. I have dealt with this on a military installation and there is a large cluster of trees we need to trip and/or remove. However, we have no easement and the owners hates us because years ago they allowed entry and apparently left the place a mess. Nothing we can do without getting into some big money and it would be a public relations nightmare.

With all this said, some trees can cause birds to roost such as pines and honeysuckle. If you live in a cold weather environment this can be more of a hazard to aircraft than a tree that just needs trimmed. Inform yourself, ask lots of questions and ask for specific references from the FAA, etc. Lastly, DOCUMENT everything, consider establishing a community group...it carries more weight than an individual person.


----------
“Nobody can ever take your integrity away from you. Only you can give up your integrity.” H. Norman Schwarzkopf
 
Posts: 3653 | Registered: July 06, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Info Guru
Picture of BamaJeepster
posted Hide Post
A little Googling for a few related articles:
https://www.google.com/search?...ceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

The first hit is from 1990 - looks like an airport board approached private property owners and asked them to cut at the property owner's expense and were told NO. Then the board offered to pay for the cutting - residents still said NO, so it was moving into a legal battle.

A few of the other articles were very similar - airport board asked, people said no, offer to pay or come to settlement and if that doesn't work, moves to a legal battle.

<I'm not an attorney, never dealt with this issue in real life and some of the articles were from years ago and different parts of the country where different rules/laws may apply, but the stories all seemed to follow a very similar track>



“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
- John Adams
 
Posts: 29408 | Location: In the red hinterlands of Deep Blue VA | Registered: June 29, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Little ray
of sunshine
Picture of jhe888
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Welcome to the world of FAA.

Short answer is they can ether force you to remove them or remove them for you (and possibly pass along the costs).

Long answer - appeal and ask them to provide the reference (a FAR?). Read up on it and determine if they are correct in their assessment.

There is a certain, conical, distance (I think that's the correct terminology) which must be free from obstructions to main and cross-wind runways and the FAA owns that airspace which the obstructions may be obstructing.


Statutes and regulations?

But, the 5th Amendment prevents the government from taking your property without compensation.

As I usually suggest when people ask for legal advice - ASK A DAMN LAWYER. Don't take advice from your invisible internet friends who don't even play lawyers on TV.




The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
 
Posts: 53362 | Location: Texas | Registered: February 10, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
אַרְיֵה
Picture of V-Tail
posted Hide Post
What type airport? This might make a difference in the legality of the situation.

If the airport is owned / operated by a governmental entity -- city, county, state, or federal, it might be very different from a privately owned airport like the one I'm based at. I do not believe (I could be wrong) that our airport has any ability to demand that obstructions on the approach be removed or relocated. We have a clear approach when landing to the north, but we have power lines very close to the runway when landing to the south. As a privately owned airport, I don't think that we have any clout; if we did, those power lines would have been re-routed underground long ago.



הרחפת שלי מלאה בצלופחים
 
Posts: 31625 | Location: Central Florida, Orlando area | Registered: January 03, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
You are getting your notice via the letter, so noice is not an issue. You will also likley get compensation for the taking, whether by agreement, or by lawsuit where a jury decides the value of what was taken. The amount depends on what is taken, of course. It might be trees, an antenna, a chimney, and on occasion entire houses. (Doesn't sound like this is case the case though). FAA has its own regs regarding this issue, as noted above. Depending on the amount of property taken, it is well worth it to hire an attorney who has defended such lawsuits. Down south of you in Ohio, I often see the same firms on other side of eminent domain cases. THey know the valuation experts, etc.

Source: I have filed and litigated such lawsuits on behalf of local governmenta. Smile
 
Posts: 514 | Registered: November 13, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Ammoholic
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by jhe888:
But, the 5th Amendment prevents the government from taking your property without compensation.

As I usually suggest when people ask for legal advice - ASK A DAMN LAWYER. Don't take advice from your invisible internet friends who don't even play lawyers on TV.


As usual, jhe888 for the win. Question for you though, What type of lawyer would one be best off with here (what specialty or specialties, if any)?
 
Posts: 7183 | Location: Lost, but making time. | Registered: February 23, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oh stewardess,
I speak jive.
Picture of 46and2
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Aquabird:
The state took 4 and 1/2 trees down in my front yard. I have owned this property for 46 years.
Somebody puts a large grain elevator in down the road a piece and they filed a complaint saying their truckers going in and out of there cannot see far enough down the road because of the trees in my yard. They were 30-45 ft tall. They have a mound of dirt and stone on the other side of their driveway that is still there, but that keeps them from seeing down the other way.

So, the short answer now, is YES they can take your trees down. At least they did not make me pay to have them cut or hauled away.(they were Austrian white pine)

I would be livid, to say the least.

That's (philosophically) wrong on so many levels.
 
Posts: 25613 | Registered: March 12, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by slosig:
quote:
Originally posted by jhe888:
But, the 5th Amendment prevents the government from taking your property without compensation.

As I usually suggest when people ask for legal advice - ASK A DAMN LAWYER. Don't take advice from your invisible internet friends who don't even play lawyers on TV.


As usual, jhe888 for the win. Question for you though, What type of lawyer would one be best off with here (what specialty or specialties, if any)?


Call your local county bar association to find out if any attorneys list defense of eminent domain actions. If that fails, google that term with your county.
 
Posts: 514 | Registered: November 13, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
The Unmanned Writer
Picture of LS1 GTO
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by jhe888:
quote:
Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Welcome to the world of FAA.

Short answer is they can ether force you to remove them or remove them for you (and possibly pass along the costs).

Long answer - appeal and ask them to provide the reference (a FAR?). Read up on it and determine if they are correct in their assessment.

There is a certain, conical, distance (I think that's the correct terminology) which must be free from obstructions to main and cross-wind runways and the FAA owns that airspace which the obstructions may be obstructing.


Statutes and regulations?

But, the 5th Amendment prevents the government from taking your property without compensation.

As I usually suggest when people ask for legal advice - ASK A DAMN LAWYER. Don't take advice from your invisible internet friends who don't even play lawyers on TV.


Lemme find that for you (not being sarcastic). May not be a statute as the FAA is like the EPA. IN the FAA's case, the regs fall under the FARs.

Kind of like people who shot down the mini UAVs (aka: drones) just because the UAV is over their property. Per the FAA, they regulate everything not touching the ground and shooting down a UAV is, technically, a federal offense.

This fall into the same realm






Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.



"If dogs don't go to Heaven, I want to go where they go" Will Rogers

The definition of the words we used, carry a meaning of their own...



 
Posts: 14220 | Location: It was Lat: 33.xxxx Lon: 44.xxxx now it's CA :( | Registered: March 22, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
The Unmanned Writer
Picture of LS1 GTO
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by jhe888:
quote:
Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Welcome to the world of FAA.

Short answer is they can ether force you to remove them or remove them for you (and possibly pass along the costs).

Long answer - appeal and ask them to provide the reference (a FAR?). Read up on it and determine if they are correct in their assessment.

There is a certain, conical, distance (I think that's the correct terminology) which must be free from obstructions to main and cross-wind runways and the FAA owns that airspace which the obstructions may be obstructing.


Statutes and regulations?

But, the 5th Amendment prevents the government from taking your property without compensation.

As I usually suggest when people ask for legal advice - ASK A DAMN LAWYER. Don't take advice from your invisible internet friends who don't even play lawyers on TV.


Here you go:

https://www.faa.gov/airports/e...g/airspace_analysis/

quote:

Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace Analysis (OE/AAA)
Airports

Share
Print
Share on Facebook
Tweet on Twitter
Share on Google+

Federal Regulation Title 14 Part 77 establishes standards and notification requirements for objects affecting navigable airspace. This notification serves as the basis for:

Evaluating the effect of the construction or alteration on operating procedures
Determining the potential hazardous effect of the proposed construction on air navigation
Identifying mitigating measures to enhance safe air navigation
Charting of new objects

Notification allows the FAA to identify potential aeronautical hazards in advance to prevent or minimize the adverse impacts to the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace.

Airport Obstructions Standards Committee
Airspace/Landing Area Forms
Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace Analysis Website - Use this site to file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1), view proposed and determined cases, access tools, and find an FAA airspace contact.
Related Advisory Circulars
Obstruction Marking and Lighting, AC 70/7460-1L
Regulation: Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace (Part 77) - The FAA published the revised Part 77 on July 21, 2010. It went into effect on January 18, 2011.


In particular you are looking for AOSC DD 02b which reads (in parts):

quote:

1) a) Historically, the FAA has applied measures to address the risk associated with obstacles near airports. The FAA works to protect airspace and ensure flight operational safety by limiting encroachment of obstacle penetration of surfaces defined by Order 8260.3, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) and 14 CFR Part 77 airport imaginary surfaces. Efforts to protect airspace by limiting the height of structures or vegetation often affect property development in the vicinity of airports.


however (section 1) Introduction)

quote:

c) The FAA does not have the authority to regulate or control how land (real property) may be used in regard to structures that may penetrate navigable airspace. (FAA Order 7400.2E, section 5-1-2a) This responsibility is generally fulfilled by local authorities or airport sponsors.

d) Aircraft operators have the responsibility to consider obstacles and make the necessary adjustments to their departure procedures to ensure safe clearance for aircraft over those obstacles.


What will happen is:

1. FAA send letter of requirement/intent to lower height of trees.
2. Land owner will balk.
3. FAA send letter of intent to local goobermint officials operating said airfield indicating they will de-certify the airfield if obstructions are not removed.

Because airfield are revenue generators, local officials will have the trees lowered by hook or crook.

Here's some more:

quote:

2) Rationale for Decision
a) The “Departure Obstacle Clearance Surface (OCS)” begins at the departure end of runway (DER) at DER elevation, and rises at a 40:1 slope in the direction of departure. Where an existing obstacle penetrates this slope, procedure specialists are allowed for the purpose of determining Part 97 departure minimums and ensuring operational efficiency, to consider the OCS originating at a height no greater than 35 feet above the DER elevation. Over time, application of the 35-foot adjustment was broadly applied to both existing and new obstacles. Policy clarification was required to reestablish a consistent standard for applying the 35-foot adjustment across the NAS.
b) In situations where proposed obstacles may conflict with air operations, the FAA solicits aeronautical information from interested parties regarding the potential impacts of these obstacles and the means by which these impacts can be mitigated. This process supports informed decision-making by various community elements on land usage. Aircraft operators have raised safety concerns in cases where penetrations to the 40:1 OCS have been built without notification that the 35-foot adjustment was used to effectively elevate the departure surface. Therefore, policy clarification was required to improve user notification where this adjustment has been made.

3) AOSC Decision (Refer to Figure 1)
In issuing determinations for proposed obstacles under 14 CFR Part 77, the following cases apply:
 Case I: Any proposed obstacle that is below a 40:1 surface originating at the DER, at DER elevation, will be evaluated according to existing OE/AAA guidance.
 Case II: Any proposed obstacle that penetrates the 40:1 surface originating at the DER, at DER elevation, by up to 35 feet will be evaluated for aeronautical effect and circularized.
 Case III: Any obstacle that penetrates the 40:1 surface originating at the DER, at DER elevation, by more than 35 feet will have a presumed adverse aeronautical effect and will be evaluated according to OE/AAA guidance for “Determination of Presumed Hazards
(DPH)”.


There's also a glide slope graphic depicting the heights - this is what the OP should consider.

Not a lawyer by any means though airport operations and certifications is my background and edumacation






Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.



"If dogs don't go to Heaven, I want to go where they go" Will Rogers

The definition of the words we used, carry a meaning of their own...



 
Posts: 14220 | Location: It was Lat: 33.xxxx Lon: 44.xxxx now it's CA :( | Registered: March 22, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Legal advice, government taking of property, more info on page two

© SIGforum 2024