5_Exhibit B_Resolution_Attachment 2

Sites Inventory and Methodology City of Pleasanton | B-17 Realistic capacity for lower income rezone parcels is generally 2 based on the proposed minimum density, whereas realistic capacity for moderate and above moderate income rezone parcels is based on the average of proposed minimum and maximum density. These densities are consistent with development trends in Pleasanton and the Tri-Valley (see Sections B.2.3 and B.2.5). Phase 6: Parcels in Prior Housing Elements Vacant parcels from both the 4th and 5th Cycles and non-vacant parcels from the 5th Cycle can be reused in this Housing Element (the 6th Cycle) to accommodate lower-income housing, but they must be rezoned to allow projects with at least 20 percent of the units affordable to lower income households to be by-right. Figures and tables in Sections B.3.2 and B.3.3 show all 6th Cycle sites and any site previously identified as a site in the 5th Cycle. Program 1.4 is included to rezone reused sites identified for lower income consistent with AB 1397. B.2.5 Suitability of Nonvacant Sites Since residential land in Pleasanton is generally built out, the sites inventory includes nonvacant sites. Nonvacant sites are relied on to accommodate more than 50 percent of the City’s lower income RHNA; therefore, the City conducted an analysis to determine whether existing uses on identified lower income sites will likely be discontinued during the planning period (2023-2031). The City’s careful analysis resulted in the removal of many potential nonvacant sites from the initial sites inventory that were determined to not be viable housing sites, including sites screened out based on lack of affirmative owner interest, complex parcelization, or with lower degrees of underutilization. Nonvacant sites that would accommodate the lower income RHNA are primarily underutilized as surface parking and/or surface parking and/or with commercial buildings3 where the existing uses are of marginal economic viability and the structures are at or near the end of their useful life. This includes that those structures (if any) were largely built in the 1980s or earlier, and the parcel has substantial available development capacity through both density and FAR (i.e., the site could triple its existing number of units and building floor area).)4. In all cases where 2 Given strong property owner interest in redeveloping particular rezone sites for residential use such as Stoneridge Mall, Laborer’s Council, Metro 580, and Oracle (see Table B-15), these sites have realistic capacities greater than the minimum density, but realistic capacities that are either equal to or less than the midpoint densities for these sites. 3 Commercial buildings and parking lots with low utilization include a furniture store that has seen a 10.3 percent decrease in sales between 2017 and 2022 and where available parking is far in excess of customer demand, based on field observation, and parking lots in downtown that provide parking in excess of the demand, also based on field observation. 4 See Section 2.4 above for redeveloped sites such as Andares and Anton Hacienda whose previous uses’ FARs and buildings’ age further support the methodology for inclusion of nonvacant sites in this Housing Element.