Can a community or a city establish them selfs as a community that does not allow UAS flight. I had a request from a customer to do a cell tower inspection. The cell tower was located in South Jordan Utah. A housing development in South Jordan Utah has stated they do not allow UAS in that community. I don't think they understand the commercial side of this. Can a community or development restrict otherwise legal flight from a commercial 107 licensed pilot? I don't think they have the authority to do this. In every other respect airspace, airports, it's legal to fly. Does anyone know where I can get the documentation to show such a community that a commercial pilot would retain the right to fly?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
I was flying a real estate job here a in an adjacent city named Mission Hills, KS. While we were flying/filming a car stops on the road and backs up to approach me. A woman rolls the window down and tells me "Hi, I'm a city councilwoman here in Mission Hills and we have a "no drone" policy here in the city limits, if you don't land I'll have to contact tge police". I explained to her that I was a commercial 107 pilot/company assigned a job from an agent and with permission from the homeowner to be filming. She replied "well that does not matter, we have a no drone policy we established last summer, you need to stop."
I took the high road and thanked her for the info, we landed. I told the homeowner/agent about the exchange and packed up and went home...with the new mission of looking this up.
Sure enough, I found the article in the Kansas City paper about Mission Hills being the first city to establish a "no drone" policy to prevent flyovers of private residences.
They also provided a link to the actual legislation. But when I looked it over, I found a clause at the bottom of the document that said "this legislation shall not prevent or hinder any authorized FAA operations". The legislation was really targeted at hobbyists who were using their drones to fly around the neighborhood for fun and over their neighbors properties.
I took the time to compose an email to the entire counsel that recalled the encounter (not naming names...Beverly) and that I lost $ on a job because of this rule. I pointed out that the aforementioned clause (as I understood it), allowed me to operate my business as usual and I had every right to fly/film as a 107/333 commercial company,
I also took the opportunity to let them know if they needed a licensed, insured sUAS company, we would be happy to be their provider...
The next day, the councilmen that drafted the legislation (we also was a lawyer) called me. He informed me that I was correct. In no way can they prevent legal, licensed companies from doing business in their city and the clause was indeed aimed at citizens within their city limits flying for hobby over properties without permission. He also asked me to join him for future presentations and it's turned into a paying / educational opportunity.
"So much confusion is there" (in Yoda voice)
with these blanket "no drone zone" press releases. So much so that even the issuing entities don't entirely understand it.
Moral of the story is, read the fine print on their policy. It may be a similar situation to this one...