5_Exhibit B_Resolution_Attachment 2

C-26 | City of Pleasanton Housing Constraints The rate of housing production in Pleasanton has exceeded housing growth in Alameda County as a whole. Since the adoption of inclusionary zoning in 2000, the total amount of housing in Pleasanton has grown by almost 19 percent, while total housing growth in Alameda County grew by approximately 13 percent. This suggests that there were no significant adverse impacts on housing production as a result of the inclusionary housing requirements in Pleasanton. Additionally, over the last Housing Element Cycle (5th Cycle), from 2015 through 2020, permits were issued for a total of 1,310 above moderate units, 45 moderate income units, 78 low-income units, and 230 very low-income units. This is an average of 277 residential unit permits per year and exceeded the overall 5th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), with the surplus being in the above moderate-income category. Pleasanton has performed similarly or better than comparable jurisdictions in making progress toward the City’s lower income RHNA. Growth Management The City adopted its first Growth Management Ordinance (GMO) in 1978, designed to regulate the location and rate of new residential growth in a period of sewage treatment constraints and air quality concerns4. The GMO is contained in Chapter 17.36 of the City’s Municipal Code. The following are exempt from the GMO:  ADUs and JADUs approved in accordance with City zoning regulations.  Mobile homes and/or living quarters located on school sites, public and institutional properties, and commercial/industrial properties used for security purposes or other purposes ancillary to the primary use, the use of which has been approved in accordance with City zoning regulations, when such residential units do not exceed one dwelling per site.  A condominium conversion or replacement unit of an existing unit demolished and/or destroyed. In 2010, the City amended its GMO so it would not prevent the City from approving residential development that furthered the City’s process towards RHNA. The City completed further revisions in 2012 and 2013 to streamline the growth management process and address requirements and conditions resulting from the Urban Habitat Settlement Agreement concerning the City’s housing cap and RHNA. In 2015, the City made additional amendments to ensure that the GMO does not include constraints that would prevent the City from meeting its share of the regional housing need for all income levels during the Housing Element planning period per 5th Cycle Housing Element Program 30.2. The 2015 amendment included a provision that if growth management unit allocations are unavailable during a particular year and the City has approved 4 The 1978 growth management ordinance, Ordinance 849, was also known as the Residential Allocation Program (RAP). Over time, the RAP became known as the Growth Management Ordinance (GMO).