Drones could be banned over most public spaces in this Colorado city, but the FAA may stand in the way

midian182

Posts: 11,843   +179
Staff member
In a nutshell: From hobby flights and package deliveries to first-responder missions, drones are becoming an increasingly common sight. But one Colorado city is considering introducing rules that would ban unauthorized flights over a long list of public places. Flying over private property without the owner's permission – or operating a drone in a "reckless or careless manner" – would also be prohibited. That could put the proposal on a collision course with the FAA, which says it has exclusive authority over aviation safety and the efficient use of US airspace.

The Wheat Ridge City Council discussed the proposed ordinance during a study session on Monday, reports Colorado Politics. The city currently relies on FAA rules, but officials cite concerns about privacy, noise, wildlife, nuisance behavior, and public safety.

Under the draft, operating a drone over or on city property without written permission from the city manager would be prohibited. That includes public streets, alleys, playgrounds, parks, open spaces, parking lots, and public buildings. The police chief could also order all drone activity within the city grounded for "specific public safety purposes."

Councilmember Rachel Hultin supported designating locations such as Creekside Park where hobbyists could fly without seeking permission. She also described a drone that hovered outside her office window for around three minutes earlier this year.

"It was pretty unnerving," Hultin said.

Police Chief Chris Murtha requested exemptions allowing police and fire departments to use drones without first obtaining the city manager's approval.

The biggest question is whether Wheat Ridge actually has the authority to control flights over these locations. FAA guidance says state and local governments may regulate drone-related privacy, trespassing, harassment, reckless endangerment, and takeoffs or landings on property they control.

However, the agency says local "No Drone Zone" designations apply only to the ground, prohibiting drone takeoffs and landings rather than flights through the airspace above. Rules restricting where drones may fly are more likely to face federal preemption than laws targeting how they are used.

In 2017, a judge struck down parts of Newton, Massachusetts' drone ordinance that prohibited flights below 400 feet over private property without the owner's consent and over public property without city permission. The court found that the rules intruded into federally controlled airspace and amounted to an effective citywide drone ban.

Wheat Ridge wouldn't be Colorado's first municipality with such restrictions. Telluride already requires a permit to operate over streets, parks, trails, and public buildings, while similar language has appeared in several other Colorado towns.

The proposal arrives as commercial drone operations keep expanding. Amazon recently announced plans to bring 30-minute Prime Air deliveries to almost 500 US cities and towns by the end of 2026, increasing its footprint sixfold. The FAA has also proposed rules making beyond-visual-line-of-sight deliveries easier.

Wheat Ridge City Attorney Gerald Dahl said the draft will be amended before returning to council. It hasn't been formally introduced, and there's no timetable for a vote.

Permalink to story:

 
They're not banning all drone flights. Just unauthorized ones. That means they want to be paid. Amazon could afford to be authorized. You could not.
 
Last edited:
Good, ban them everywhere. Only authorized government agencies should be able to fly drones anywhere they please. Private citizens should only be able to fly them over their own property or places they've gotten permission to do so. The fines for violating these laws should be steep.
 
I hope we can find common sense and allow them in many scenic locations.
How about instead of outright banning them, we create laws to make it
very clear that every drone owner is fully responsible for his drone
and whatever damage it can do.

I have skyrover s1, there are so many places I would like to see through its camera. And the only way I can do it is if I disregard the bans on flying
 
I've been flying these things for YEARS. Never had an issue. Because...I FLY WITHIN THE RULES!
I check a couple FAA approved flight apps for NFZ's, and areas where I can fly within a LAANC, I get
the approval and stay within the height limit & time limit. My drones are all registered, even my DJI
Mini2, which because of it's light weight, does not need to be registered, but since I add strobes for
flying at night from time to time, that would put it over the limit.
The "air" is not owned by anyone public or private, it is controlled and maintained by the FAA. Don't like it, get congress to change the rules.
I think because of what has been going on in Ukraine & Russia, state/local governments sees UAV's as potential "terrorist" attack vehicles and want to ban them.
It would be a shame too. I take a lot of photos from the air. Mostly scenic but I have taken a few shots for friends that don't want to risk climbing on their steep roof houses and what not.
 
Back