1.  New real estate disclosure requirements.
2.  New property deed restrictions,
3.  New building restrictions,

Each area is outlined below in greater detail.

Real Estate Disclosure -- Disclosure of airport proximity is recommended as part of residential real estate transactions and lease or rental agreements for all residential property within the "airport influence area" (which is all parcels within 2.6 miles of one or more runways, and the entire town of Clyde).  The Airport influence Zone is shown in the red circle in the map below plus an extension (which is not shown by the red line) which covers Clyde:

Click on the Map to get a detailed view
(WARNING: 266K file, long download time!)

We will give you the proposed text of the policy next, and then we will decipher it for you and give you the likely consequences:

Proposed Policy Text:

4.4.3   Buyer Awareness Measures -- Given the preceding characteristics of overflight concerns, the ALUC deems it important for prospective purchasers of property, particularly residential property, within various portions of the airport influence area to be informed about airport activity impacts so that they can take these factors into account in making their purchase decisions.  The compatibility policies for Buchanan Field Airport and Byron Airport include three types of buyer awareness measures:

(a) Avigation easements ***[text omitted] ***.
(b) Deed Notices ***[text omitted] ***.
(c) Real estate disclosure of airport proximity is the buyer awareness measure best suited to addressing widespread aircraft overflight concerns.  The ALUC recommends that the proximity of Buchanan Field Airport or Byron Airport be disclosed as part of real estate transactions and lease or rental agreements involving any residential property within the respective airport influence area.
*The disclosure may refer to the fact that residents of property within this area may find such overflights to be annoying and/or disruptive to their enjoyment of the property.  However, the disclosure statement  need say nothing more than the property lies within the Buchanan  Field Airport or Byron Airport influence area as defined by the Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Commission.
*The ALUC shall periodically provide notification to local Realtors and other appropriate real estate professionals regarding the existence of this policy.

Discussion by People Over Planes: 

Translation:
Under this proposed policy, the ALUC would periodically notify Realtors that they should make one or both of the following disclosure statements to prospective buyers of all properties within the red circle (and the entire town of Clyde): 
(1) the property is in an area where residents might find overflights of aircraft to be annoying and/or disruptive to the enjoyment of the property;
(2) the property is within the influence area of Buchanan Field Airport.

The first disclosure statement is a subjective judgment, the second disclosure statement is a factual judgment  Although the term "airport influence area" sounds somewhat ominous, it is official terminology for being located within 14,000 ft, or 2.65 miles, of an airport runway.  Hopefully realtors will word the second disclosure statement as: "the property is within 2.65 miles of a runway at Buchanan Field Airport."

Although the consultant has characterized this policy as a "recommendation" rather than a "requirement," he stated in the November 3rd 1999 workshop that once this policy is presented to the local board of Realtors, they will be compelled by law to follow it.

The risks. 
The risk of using the first disclosure is that it will unduly scare off prospective buyers.  While either of the above real estate disclosures will have minimal effect in a hot real estate market, they will have large effects in slow markets, 5% or more for the first disclosure statement (in a slow market, why buy in Concord or Pleasant Hill when the buyer can buy a house in  Walnut Creek that doesn't have a disclosure statement?).

The risk of only using the second disclosure statement is that it opens you up to being sued by the buyer after the sale if the buyer later decides that he/she paid too much for the property, possible for any reason.  While you might have determined that your property was far enough away from the airport to not have annoying or disruptive overflights to your standards, the buyer may decide after moving in that the overflights are annoying and/or disruptive to his/her standards, and may further decide that you failed to disclose a defect in the property by failing to use the first disclosure statement recommended by the ALUC.

In order to minimize their chances of being sued, local realtors may decide to use the first disclosure statement (the subjective one) for all properties within the influence area.  We suspect that the first lawsuit on this issue would cause Realtors to take this stance if they do not take it from the beginning. 

OUR VIEW: The predominant practice by local realtors is to disclose the distance of the property from the airport.  In this regard, buyers and sellers have equal responsibilities: the seller to disclose proximity, and the buyer to assess the degree of annoyance or disruption to his/her standards.  The proposed ALUC policy effective shifts all the responsibilities to the seller. 

Further important information.
    The proposal will increase your risk to being sued by the buyer of your home if you inadvertently forget to make the required disclosure.  (This applies to mainly to those homeowners who are at the edge of the disclosure circle.)

    The proposal could interfere with the ability to recover damages from the Airport due to increased noise, such as from increased helicopter training, increased corporate jet activity, and the possible start of the start-up commercial airlines.  If you purchase a home with this disclosure, and then later sue the airport for damages due to increased airport noise, a judge and jury may feel that you do not have a right to sue because you know that the property was was in an area were it was a "fact that residents of property within this area may find such overflights to be annoying and/or disruptive to their enjoyment of the property."

     Our off the record discussion with realtors, lawyers, and appraisers, indicates that this proposal could lower your property value by around 5%, or possibly more.  It puts a cloud over your property, and could portend of future impacts on your home due to increased airport noise.

      Over 17,000 homes in Concord, Pleasant Hill, Martinez, and Pacheco (approximately 24 square miles) will be affected by this proposal. Consumer protection is cited as the reason for the requirement, but that ignores existing California  disclosure law and practices that are among the most stringent nationwide.  The proposal does not include compensation for impact to your property value.

     Aircraft activity at Buchanan Field has declined 38% since 1978.  The Airport's noise ordinance has not been aggressively enforced. More disturbing, the noise mitigation program developed in the 1980's was discontinued three years ago.  Efforts at reactivation have been less than vigorous with marginal results.  In addition, commercial airline service is now being proposed.  The community is being asked to accept the proposed real estate disclosure in view of these events. 
 

Click on the Map to get a 2X enlarged view
(WARNING: 222K file, long download time!)
It is not known at this time if a rebuilding of an existing property constitutes a "new development."

Click on the Map to get a 2X enlarged view
(WARNING: 541K file, long download time!)
 

    * The four Zones 2 are roughly equivalent to the four existing safety zones. The Zone 2 which covers the Target shopping center in Pleasant Hill has been extended by roughly 300 ft due to changes at the runway ends, while the other three Zones 2 have been retracted by roughly 300 feet in recognition of certain displaced Thresholds (DTs) at the ends of some runways.

    * Zones 3 and 4 are entirely new. Restrictions are provided below.

    *  Proposed new homeowner disclosure requirements for homeowners within 2.6 miles of a runway.  See the bottom of the page for the map of this zone.

* No building over 2 stories. 

* No building over 2 stories.

* Any Assemblages of people.

* Any new structures which exceed FAA height limits (FAR 77).
* Buildings.

* Dwellings.

* All prohibited uses in Zones 2-4.
 

* Buildings.

* Dwellings.

* All un-acceptable uses in Zones 2- and 4.
* Structures, except those needed for aeronautical function.
 

* Parks with very low intensity uses.

* Aircraft tie downs.

* Auto parking.

* Nurseries.

* Outside storage.
 

* Parks with low intensity uses. 

* Warehouses
(2 stories or less).

* Heavy industrial uses.
(2 stories or less).

* Light industrial uses and possibly offices.
(2 stories or less).

The next four items might be acceptable uses, but the Consultant has not yet specified them...
* Restaurants (one story maximum).

* Retail uses (one story maximum).

* Office and financial uses (two story maximum).

* Motels (two story maximum).

Safety Zone Exception: Within Safety Zones 2, 3, and 4, higher intensity uses may be permitted on a case-by-case basis if the design includes special measures to reduce risks to building occupants in the event of an aircraft collision with the structure. 

10% expansion permitted for non-comforming buildings: The consultant has proposed that existing, non-conforming buildings within Zones 2, 3, and 4 be permitted a one-time 10% expansion in the case of rebuilding or remodeling.  For example, a non-conforming building which is destroyed by fire or earthquake would be allowed to be rebuilt to 110% of its original size.