City council ponders ban 
A proposal to ban drones within Springfield city limits may not remain as strict as currently written, according to a sponsor.
“I don’t necessarily expect that this version that we have right now is the version that will go to the council (for a final vote),” says Ward 3 Ald. Kris Theilen, who is sponsoring the measure along with Mayor Jim Langfelder. “I expect a full discussion at committee.”
As written, the proposed ordinance set for a council committee-of-the-whole hearing next week would not allow drones to be flown anywhere anytime for any reason. Theilen said he became concerned when a constituent saw a drone flying near the City Water, Light and Power plant and called him.
“I’m not trying to be crazy,” Theilen said.
“They just had some concerns that someone could use something like that. … We looked into it and it turns out that there was nothing on the books about drones at all.”
The city also has no rules on more traditional radio-controlled aircraft that hobbyists have enjoyed long before the digital age allowed anyone with a smartphone and as little as $50 to take to the skies. The proposed ordinance would allow such oldschool aircraft, but would prohibit them from carrying cameras, set a ceiling of 100 feet and require that they remain within sight of on-ground human pilots.
Theilen said that he’s concerned about drones interfering with medical helicopters, and he’s heard of drones being shot down out of concerns that they were being used as eyes in the sky to capture teenage girls sunbathing in backyards.
“It’s that kind of world we live in,” Theilen says.
Theilen said that he expects the proposal to be debated and amended. One possibility is allowing drones to be flown if they don’t stray from air above parks or land owned by the operator, he said.
The city isn’t alone in trying to regulate drones. The Federal Aviation Administration is pondering regulations. Gov. Bruce Rauner last month appointed a task force to study drones and recommend regulations by July 1.
For Ron Duff, all the looming regulations are a bit unnerving.
Duff, a real estate broker, owns two drones. It is, he says, a bit addicting, not to mention a boon to his business as a real estate broker. Online property listings that include aerial footage get more attention than those with photographs alone, he said.
“Regulations are probably a good idea, but banning it entirely is just ridiculous,” Duff said.
Duff compares a drone ban to banning cars because some people exceed the speed limit. Amazon, which has announced plans to eventually deliver packages with drones, already sells hundreds of different models of drones that cost as little as $44 and as much as $8,700.
“They’re not going to ban this technology,” Duff predicts. “It’s everywhere. … I’m not the only guy in town who has a drone. There has to be dozens of us. I’ve met a number of them.”
Duff is now on his third attempt to get Federal Aviation Administration approval to use drones for commercial purposes so that he can accept money from other real estate brokers for taking aerial footage of property. He’s already formed a company called Aerial Imaging Services. But getting FAA approval isn’t easy, he said. The application is 112 pages long, he said, and his first two submissions were returned as incomplete.
“The FAA, they don’t mess around,” Duff said. “It’s a very arduous process.”
When he takes aerial footage to augment his real estate listings, Duff said that he distributes fliers informing neighbors in advance and includes his telephone number so that anyone with concerns can contact him.
“When I fly mine, people get out their cellphones and take videos of it,” Duff said. “They’re in awe of it. They’re not hard to fly, but you have to be mindful of what you’re doing.”
Security personnel asked him to land his drone when they spotted it flying near the Capitol, Duff said, and he was happy to comply, even though there are no regulations saying that he can’t take pictures of the Capitol dome from the sky.
“They said ‘We don’t know if you’re allowed to do that or not,’” Duff recalls. “‘Do you mind landing it?’” Duff said he agrees that drone operators should register their aircraft with authorities and keep them within sight. It’s also a good idea to require a minimum number of flying hours before allowing someone to operate within city limits, he said. A ceiling of 100 feet is too low, however, and it’s not realistic to require that drones not take footage of anything other than property belonging to the drone operator, he said.
While listings of properties that include aerial footage get 10 times the number of online hits as properties without birdseye views, Duff said, there is more to drones than money.
“I can’t deny the fact that it’s fun,” he said.
Contact Bruce Rushton at [email protected].
