1
CITY OF MONTEREY
GENERAL PLAN
JANUARY 2005
2
Table of Contents
Introduction …………………………………………………..……………………………………. 4
Urban Design Element ……………………………………..……………………………………… 7
Land Use Element ……………………………………….……………………………………….. 15
Circulation Element ……………………………………….………………………………...…… 26
Housing Element ………………………………………….……………………………………… 53
Conservation Element …………………………………….……………………………………… 66
Open Space Element ……………………………………….…………………………………….. 73
Safety Element …………………………………………………………………………………… 78
Noise Element ……………………………………………………………………………………. 89
Economic Element………………………………….…………………………………………….. 98
Social Element ………………………………………………………………………………….. 103
Historic Preservation Element ………………………………...………………………………… 109
Public Facilities Element …………………………………...…………………………………… 113
Glossary …………………………………………………………..…………………………….. 123
3
List of Maps
1. Showing Planning Area …………………………………………………………… 6
2. Showing Special Places………….………………………………………………… 9
3. Showing Land Use ………………………………………………………………… 18
4. Showing Mixed Use Villages……………………….…………………………….. 23
5. Showing Street Classifications………….………………………………………… 50
6. Showing Visitor Routes ………………………………………………………… 51
7. Showing Truck Routes ………………….………………………………………… 52
8. Showing Special Status Species Occurrences ……………………………………. 71
9. Showing Habitat Management Areas ……..………………………………………. 72
10. Showing Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces …………………………………….. 75
11. Showing Seismic Hazards …………………………..…………………………….. 81
12. Showing Steep Slopes …………………………..………………………………… 83
13. Showing Flood Zones …………………………………………………………… 84
14. Showing Fire Hazards ……………………..…………………………………… 86
15. Showing Evacuation Routes …………………………………………………….. 88
16. Showing Noise Contours …………………………………………………….. 91
17. Showing Airport Noise Contours ……...………………………………………... 97
List of Tables
1. Citywide Anticipated Development Potential…………………………………… 21
2. City of Monterey Plans ……….………………………………………………… 25
3. Functional Street Classifications ………………………………………………… 34
4. Truck Routes …………………………………………………………………. 37
5. Visitor Routes ………………………………………………………………… 38
6. Roadway Level of Service ( LOS) Standard …………………………………… 49
7. Noise Exposure Standards ………….…………………………………………… 95
8. Land Use and Noise Compatibility Standards …………………………………… 96
4
What is a General Plan?
State Requirements
California State law requires that each city adopt a comprehensive, long- term general plan for
the physical development of the area under its jurisdiction. This general plan must include
seven elements that together compose an integrated set of goals, policies, and action
programs. These seven required elements are land use, circulation, housing, conservation,
open space, safety, and noise. In addition, a city may adopt optional elements that relate to the
physical development of the community.
The City of Monterey General Plan contains the following elements:
Urban Design
Land Use
Circulation
Housing
Conservation
Open Space
Safety
Noise
Economic
Social
Historic Preservation
Public Facilities
Regardless of whether a city is revising its entire general plan or amending only part, it
must follow certain requirements:
a. Every new element or addition to the general plan must be consistent with the other
adopted elements.
b. A general plan must cover all territory within its jurisdiction and any lands outside
that relate to its planning effort. The City's planning area is defined in more detail in
the following sections.
c. A general plan must be long term. It must project future conditions and needs and the
impacts of city policies in the General Plan. Both intermediate ( five to ten years) and
long- range ( 10 to 20 years) projections are used in this plan. These projections should be
updated as often as necessary to keep them current.
d. A general plan must include extensive citizen participation. The City of Monterey's
General Plan was drafted with the assistance of a citizen's advisory group representing a
wide cross section of various community groups interested in the future development of
the city.
e. A general plan must be prepared and implemented in close cooperation with other
public agencies. The City has been fortunate in that most Monterey Peninsula cities and
the County have been revising all or major parts of their general plans during the past
5
two years. This has facilitated the interchange of ideas and projections on the future
growth of the region.
f. A general plan must meet the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act ( CEQA). An Environmental Impact Report ( EIR) on this plan was
prepared by a private consulting firm.
An Effective General Plan
In addition to the state requirements, a general plan should measure up to the following
practical criteria to be a worthwhile, usable, and effective planning document. It should:
a. Be a living document. The policies and programs in this general plan should be updated
on an annual basis to ensure it reflects current City attitudes.
b. Address all issues the City feels is important. In addition to the seven state- required
elements or subject areas, this general plan includes elements such as urban design,
historic preservation, public facilities, social services, and economics.
c. Be the main source of overall City goals and policies on the future development of
the community. This general plan is intended to be the primary document to which the
City Council, City commissions, residents, and developers turn for determining
prevailing values and attitudes on the future development of the community.
d. Be realistic, up to date, and include truthful statements about what is and is not
tolerated in the community.
e. Be available, readable, and understandable. The plan should be clear and concise,
free of jargon and abstract terminology.
The Planning Area
As indicated above in the State Requirements section, a city's general plan should cover any areas
outside its boundaries that, in the city's judgement, bear relation to its planning. Since issues do not
respect political boundaries, the law provides for planning outside these boundaries. In this way,
the city can consider the plans of neighboring cities and the county for land adjacent to Monterey's
city limits.
There are four types of areas that a city should consider in planning for future development. All
four of these areas are considered within Monterey's planning area for this general plan. These four
areas are:
1. Area within the current city limits;
2. Unincorporated territory that may ultimately be annexed ( called sphere of influence);
3. Unincorporated territory that is not planned for future annexation but bears some relation
to the city's planning; and
4. Incorporated territory of other cities that bears some relation to Monterey's planning.
6
Figure 1, Showing Planning Area
7
Urban Design Element
INTRODUCTION
The renowned scenic environment of Monterey and the Peninsula stems from its two dominant
features: the coastline and the central ridge of wooded hills. The preservation of these two
features is essential to maintain the scenic character of the Peninsula.
The wooded ridgeline runs through the heart of the Peninsula, separating Monterey from Del
Monte Forest, Carmel, and Carmel Valley. This ridgeline terminates in a hill covered with pines
at the top of the Presidio. Numerous fingers of open space extend outward from this ridge to the
sea, helping to define the Peninsula communities.
The City of Monterey is bounded on the south by this pine- covered ridgeline and to the north by
the crescent- shaped southerly end of Monterey Bay. The series of wooded canyons, which
radiate from the ridge to the bay, are separated by a series of mesas. Each mesa is isolated from
the others, allowing the natural separation of various types of land uses. The Monterey Peninsula
Airport is located on the most easterly mesa. On the next mesa to the west are the Josselyn
Canyon and Fisherman’s Flats, Deer Flats Park, and Aguajito Oaks residential subdivisions.
Next is the Del Monte Golf Course. Isolated by canyon and wooded areas to the west is the
higher- density Navy housing development called La Mesa Village. Monterey Peninsula College
is next on its own mesa. Alta Mesa is an adjacent residential area bordered by two wooded
greenbelts. The same pattern runs through Monterey Vista and Monte Regio to the Presidio,
although this part of the city has been developed more homogeneously into single family homes.
Many of the canyons act as the circulation links serving the mesas. Highway 68, Josselyn
Canyon Road, Aguajito Road, Iris Canyon Drive, and Pacific Street all run through canyons,
which connect with Fremont Street. Two of these canyons are already city parks. The beauty of
Highway 68 ( Monterey- Salinas Highway) stems from its location in a wooded canyon. These
roads thus serve the mesas as wooded, park- like drives, and provide visually pleasing and
environmentally sensitive open space within the City.
Monterey growth has responded to these physical features: Downtown commercial on the flatter
old marsh area, lighter commercial and medium- density residential on the sloping mesas,
neighborhoods separated by the wooded canyons, and low- density residential in the steep
wooded foothills.
The goals and resultant policies included in this overview were developed to guide future urban
design decisions. They focus on preserving and enhancing Monterey’s aesthetic environment,
and were developed around two central concepts: Monterey’s special physical setting and its
image as a town.
Monterey’s image is that of a small- scale residential community beside the bay, framed by a
forested hill backdrop and drawing its charm from a rich historical background, certain
commercial enterprises, and natural scenic beauty.
More than 20 percent of the land in Monterey is owned by other governmental agencies, which
are not subject to local laws. Land use decisions for areas outside the City limits are made by the
County. Coordination and collaboration with these other government agencies is essential to
assure that urban design goals are met.
8
Goals and Policies
a. Shoreline and Bay
The water’s edge is a particularly important
natural feature because of the broad range of
activities it supports. In order to maximize
public use and enjoyment, City policy is to
improve vistas and access; clean up beaches,
protect remaining sand dunes, and protect
the natural rocky shoreline character; protect
the harbor from future landfill of any kind;
screen or otherwise soften the intrusion of
automobiles.
Goal a. Balance natural resources and
public use of the shoreline and Bay, based
on natural features, historic setting, maritime
activities, and public access ( see Figure 1).
Beach and Dunes
Policy a. 1. Conserve and enhance the
environment of the beaches and sand
dunes as natural attractions, and improve
public access consistent with dune
preservation goals. Integrate the beaches
and dunes into a continuous natural
setting.
Window on the Bay and Beach
Policy a. 2. Develop for active park and
beach use, but minimize parking and
building intrusion into the park.
Marina, Shoreline Park, Wharves, and
Breakwater
Policy a. 3. Retain active waterfront
activities, including commercial and sport
fishing, working wharves, boat access,
and boat repair, which show Monterey’s
historic interface with the Bay. Maintain
a natural appearance and maritime use of
the water’s edge.
Inner and Outer Harbor
Policy a. 4. Keep random mooring
concept intact in the outer harbor because
of its special scenic value.
Policy a. 5. Do not overcrowd the harbor
with boat slips and moorings. A limited
number of boat slips and moorings are
appropriate where they help maintain the
visual qualities of the maritime setting.
San Carlos Beach Park
Policy a. 6. Maintain views, active park
use, and the rocky shoreline at San Carlos
Beach Park.
Cannery Row
Policy a. 7. Protect the rugged coastline
and open up the view to the water and
rocky shore as much as possible while
also respecting historic resources and
building footprints over the water, as
noted in the Cannery Row Local Coastal
Program.
Policy a. 8. Preserve and maintain the
natural environment of the Ed Ricketts
underwater park and tidelands.
Policy a. 9. Enhance the visual qualities
of the Monterey Bay Coastal Trail.
Preserve and enhance views from the
Trail to natural features as much as
possible and encourage access from the
trail to the Bay.
9
Figure 2, Showing Special Places
10
b. Wooded Skyline and Foothills
The pine- and oak- covered ridge and
foothills are perceived as part of Monterey.
Although portions are beyond the city limits,
these important visual elements are within
the City’s area of concern. The continuity of
Monterey’s forested backdrop should
remain intact.
Goal b. Preserve the wooded skyline and
foothills, which provide the southern and
eastern framework for the City, including
areas within and beyond the City limits.
Policy b. 1. The visual skyline and
foothills beyond the city limits should be
under the City’s control. One method of
achieving this would be annexation. The
City should engage in active
collaboration with other governmental
agencies and advocate for preservation of
the forested areas.
Policy b. 2. New development in the ridge
areas should be sensitively located to
preserve the forested setting.
Development in the ridge areas should
not silhouette against the skyline.
Policy b. 3. Trees in forested areas should
be preserved, and denuded areas should
be reforested where feasible.
Policy b. 4. Foothill areas can be
preserved by allowing low- density
development, or clustered development
with open space.
Policy b. 5. Development in forested areas
should not create obvious holes in the
forest.
Policy b. 6. Trails in forested areas are
encouraged to allow for passive public
enjoyment of the natural setting.
c. Wooded Canyons
Most of Monterey’s neighborhoods sit on
various gently sloping mesas, and are
defined by and insulated from other
neighborhoods by wooded canyons. These
canyons are wonderful natural barriers,
which limit neighborhood size and have
allowed neighborhoods to grow with unique
characteristics and architectural styles. In
many cases the canyons also are the location
of scenic roads. The interconnecting system
of canyons is vital to natural drainage and
wildlife habitat.
Goal c. Respect and retain the wooded
canyons as distinctive natural features, as
the natural separation of neighborhoods, as
locations for scenic roadways, and as
recreational opportunities.
Policy c. 1. Maintain the canyons and
their native vegetation throughout their
lengths.
d. Lakes and Waterways
Lake El Estero, Washerwoman’s Pond, Del
Monte Lake at the Naval Postgraduate
School, and Laguna Grande to the east of
Monterey are significant visual resources
and recreation opportunities. The waterways
feeding these lakes are part of the system of
wooded canyons, which help define the
community.
Goal d. Maintain lakes and waterways, and
natural drainage.
Policy d. 1. Discourage proliferation of
surface parking and other hard surface,
man- made improvements at Lake El
Estero.
Policy d. 2. Coordinate with the Naval
Postgraduate School to allow use of Del
Monte Lake as an historic public view
and recreation resource.
11
Policy d. 3. Coordinate with the City of
Seaside to assure that Roberts Lake and
Laguna Grande remain as marsh habitat
and scenic resources for both Seaside and
Monterey.
e. Historic Buildings
The number and concentration of adobes in
Monterey, the broad range of other historic
buildings with state, national, and
international historic significance, and the
wealth of locally significant historic
buildings makes the City of Monterey
special and historically very significant.
Goal e. Historic buildings, gardens,
districts, and their settings should continue
to be protected and restored, keeping the
flavor of the past. ( See also the Historic
Preservation Element.)
Policy e. 1. Protect and enhance the
setting of historic buildings.
Policy e. 2. Respect the scale of historic
buildings by careful design of adjacent
buildings.
Policy e. 3. Maintain the downtown path
of history and develop additional paths of
history in areas like Cannery Row,
Presidio of Monterey and other historic
areas.
f. Vistas
Vistas which focus on Monterey’s most
scenic amenities should be added wherever
possible, and improved where existing.
Goal f. Maintain existing vistas and seek to
improve new vista points seen from
roadways, parks, and other public spaces.
Collaborate with other agencies to protect
city vistas and scenic amenities.
Policy f. 1. Campuses: Maintain large
campuses as open space amenities within
Monterey ( e. g., Monterey Peninsula
College, Naval Postgraduate School,
Defense Language Institute, Monterey
Peninsula Unified School District, and
private school and college sites). Fencing
and walls on these large sites should be
screened by landscape elements, rather
than being placed between landscape
elements and streets or vistas.
Policy f. 2. Monterey Bay Park:
Complete Monterey Bay Park.
Policy f. 3. Wharf and Cannery Row:
Maintain and enhance vistas.
Policy f. 4. Del Monte Lake at Navy
School: Open up and maintain the vista
of Del Monte Lake from Del Monte
Avenue.
Policy f. 5. Freeway: Preserve and
enhance the view of the bay, the dunes,
Laguna Grande, Roberts Lake, and
wooded hillsides.
Policy f. 6. Del Monte Avenue: Screen
the commercial area along Del Monte
Avenue from Seaside to Washington
Street.
Policy f. 7. Lighthouse Curve: Preserve
and enhance views of the Presidio and the
Harbor.
City- Wide
Policy f. 8. Remove overhead wires.
Policy f. 9. : Discourage high levels of
ambient light and maintain night skies
where stars can be seen.
Policy f. 10. Encourage parking to be
placed underground or away from the
street to improve the pedestrian
experience.
12
g. Landscaping
Goal g. Landscape elements should be
consistent and compatible within each area.
Policy g. 1. Use landscaping for framing
vistas.
Policy g. 2. Favor native species.
Policy g. 3. Discourage noxious invasive
plants such as genista, pampas grass, ice
plant, and Kukui grass where appropriate
by direct action and educating the public
that these are not appropriate landscape
materials.
Policy g. 4. Use landscaping to screen
parking lots and structures, including Del
Monte Center, from freeway.
Policy g. 5. Protect existing cypress,
Monterey pine, and coast live oak trees in
urban and historic contexts, replant when
removal is necessary, and retain the
health of the stands.
Policy g. 6. Use trees to soften existing
parking structures.
Policy g. 7. Use landscaping to screen
parking where appropriate.
Policy g. 8. Encourage planting of trees
on public and private land throughout the
City of Monterey.
h. Scenic Entrances and Corridors
All major roads leading to Monterey are
scenic corridors. The setting of each varies,
and their sum imparts a strong and lasting
impression of natural beauty. These scenic
gateways, which everyone experiences upon
both arriving and leaving town, should be
protected and enhanced. The missing links
should be filled in, the scenic edges should
be extended to natural boundaries where
possible, and unnecessary man- made visual
barriers should be removed. Elements which
detract from the natural setting ( such as
utility lines and large signs) should be
eliminated or screened.
A major consideration in the design and
review of development proposals within
scenic corridors is their impact on views
from the scenic roadways.
Past City of Monterey and county general
plans have recommended that a system of
“ parkways” be created along these scenic
wooded entrance roadways. These plans
indicated that such a system would be one of
the Peninsula’s major attractions. Residents
and visitors alike gain their major
impressions of the area from the views from
our principal roads.
There is one state and one county officially
adopted scenic highways in the City’s
planning area. The state scenic highway is
Highway One, from Monterey- Salinas
Highway to the Carmel River. The county
scenic highway is Monterey Salinas-
Highway from Highway 1 to the Salinas
River.
Goal h. Protect and enhance scenic
entrances shown on Figure 2, which follow
a parkway concept.
Policy h. 1. Significant natural features
within scenic corridors should be
preserved and enhanced to the maximum
extent possible in the design and
construction of scenic entrances. These
natural features include: ridgelines,
hilltops, rock outcroppings, stream and
creek beds, scenic vistas, wildlife
habitats, Monterey pine and oak groves,
and other significant natural vegetation.
Policy h. 2. Highway construction grading
should not take place outside the roadway
right- of- way.
Policy h. 3. Consideration should be
given to using bridges for crossing
13
wooded canyons. Highways should be
designed to blend with the natural
topography and prevent large cut- and- fill
operations.
Policy h. 4. Roadway lighting and signing
should be minimized, of low- profile
design, and designed to enhance the
scenic character of the corridor.
Policy h. 5. Bridge abutments and
drainage structures should be blended
into the natural terrain as much as
possible.
Policy h. 6. Where feasible, direct
driveway access to scenic entrances
should not be permitted from individual
properties. Most of the scenic corridors
run through wooded canyons and create a
rural feeling. This effect will be
destroyed if residences are permitted to
line the roadway in a manner similar to
Josselyn Canyon Road.
Policy h. 7. Frontage roads should not
parallel scenic freeway lanes unless
screened by terrain or vegetation.
Frontage roads detract from the scenic
qualities of an area and should be located
within an adjacent development or
screened by natural features where
possible.
Policy h. 8. Landscaped greenbelt areas
should be established along the borders of
scenic entrances.
Policy h. 9. Landscape buffers should be
provided at least 100 feet in width from
the ultimate planned right- of- way of
State- designated scenic highways.
Policy h. 10. Developments visible from
Scenic Entrances should blend into the
natural surroundings and not
detrimentally impact significant natural
features such as the wooded ridgeline,
hilltops, etc.
Highway 1
Policy h. 11. Maintain existing vistas of
the city, forest, bay and dunes.
Policy h. 12. Prohibit new commercial
signing which is oriented to freeways and
phase out existing commercial signing
which is oriented to freeways.
Policy h. 13. Screen industrial elements.
Policy h. 14. Work with CalTRANS to
maintain or reinforce native landscaping,
with appropriate planting.
Policy h. 15. Encourage designation of all
of Highway 1 as a scenic highway.
Holman Highway
Policy h. 16. Reverse the visual
degradation of scenic forests.
Policy h. 17. Avoid further illumination
from Community Hospital of the
Monterey Peninsula.
Policy h. 18. Screen buildings close to the
Highway with native vegetation, such as
Monterey pines, oaks, and cypress.
Monterey- Salinas Highway
Policy h. 19. Reverse the visual
degradation of scenic forests.
Policy h. 20. Avoid further illumination
along Ryan Ranch and Garden Road
Business Park areas.
Policy h. 21. Screen buildings close to the
Highway with native vegetation, such as
Coast Live Oak.
Policy h. 22. Maintain the scenic corridor.
14
Munras Avenue
Policy h. 23. Encourage use of native
trees on the motel side of the street to be
more compatible with Don Dahvee Park.
Del Monte Avenue
Policy h. 24. Enhance the excellent scenic
value in the central portion by the Naval
Postgraduate School, and make the scenic
resources more evident to the public.
Policy h. 25. Enhance both ends by filling
in missing portions of landscaping and
eliminating clutter from signs, wires,
poles, etc.
Aguajito, Jacks Peak, and Monhollan
Roads
Policy h. 26. Maintain a low- speed scenic
road and retain the informal and natural
quality.
Pacific Street
Policy h. 27. Plant out the Heritage
Harbor parking structure using native
trees such as cypress.
Policy h. 28. Maintain the natural setting
of upper Pacific Street and the street tree
canopy along lower Pacific Street.
15
Land Use Element
INTRODUCTION
This Land Use Element is a summary of the expected future land use in Monterey, consistent
with the goals, policies and programs in the other elements of the General Plan.
The main part of this Land Use Element is the Land Use Plan map. This map illustrates the land
use implications of all elements of the General Plan. The Land Use Plan map does not address
urban design issues such as the height of buildings and general aesthetics. It also cannot address
many social, economic, and public facilities issues. The policies and programs dealing with these
important issues are found here in the Land Use Element and in the other elements of the
General Plan.
The General Plan is a comprehensive, long- term plan for physical development of the City. The
California Supreme Court has declared the General Plan to be the “ constitution for all future
developments.” The General Plan is a policy- level document that governs future land use, but it
is not the implementing tool. The Zoning Ordinance is the primary implementation tool for
General Plan land use policies. Zoning is a legal and technical concept that was created in the
early part of the last century to help local government control and regulate the uses of land. A
zoning district regulates the use of the land, the height and use of buildings, and other standards
and regulations regarding how the land can be used.
A proposed private or public project must be found consistent with the recommendations of the
general plan before it can be approved by the city. Consistency with the general plan under state
law means that a proposed project must conform or agree with the goals, policies, objectives,
land uses, and programs specified in the general plan.
The City of Monterey covers 8.4 square miles of land area, or 5,382 acres. Approximately 3.5
square miles of water area in Monterey Bay is also within the Monterey City limits.
16
a. Land Use Plan
The Land Use Plan is a representation of what the community could look like with a
continuation of local and regional market forces and the comprehensive implementation of
General Plan policies. The Land Use Plan is divided into five land use categories: residential;
public/ semipublic; parks, recreation, and open space; industrial; and commercial. The plan also
indicates the location of park sites, public schools, and hospitals.
The Land Use Plan serves a number of purposes. It is a summary of all the policies and pro-grams
which can be mapped, a general guide for preparing more detailed plans for specific areas
or neighborhoods of the city, and a guide for the zoning and development of individual parcels of
land in the city where there are no adopted area plans.
Residential. The single largest land use category in the City of Monterey is residential.
Single- family homes occupy the vast majority of residential land. Single- family ( R- 1) zoning is
the most restrictive and will require a zone change by the City Council before the land could be
put to other uses.
In 1994, the City’s zoning standards were changed to encourage mixed commercial and
residential use in commercial zones. Commercial areas are now a primary site for new housing,
both mixed use ( i. e. a mix of commercial and residential buildings and dwellings), and
apartments. Many of the commercial areas have strong amenities, access to services, jobs, and
transportation, and public infrastructure which make them desirable for housing as well as
commercial use.
Commercial. The main commercial areas are: The downtown area, focused around three-block-
long Alvarado Street; Del Monte regional shopping center; commercial development along
Lighthouse Avenue, Del Monte Avenue, and North Fremont Street; visitor commercial areas in
downtown, Cannery Row, Fisherman's Wharf, and along Munras Avenue; and medical offices
concentrated around the Pacific - El Dorado- Cass Street area.
Industrial. Less than one percent of the city land area is devoted to industrial uses. In an attempt
to broaden the city's economic base and provide an area for industrial development, a 300- acre
Ryan Ranch area east of the city at the intersection of State Highways 68 and 218 was annexed
in 1968 and is the primary reservoir of industrial land.
Public/ Semi- Public/ Military. The military and other public facilities categories cover 46% of the
city's land area. This is due in large part to the streets and highways and the school facilities of:
the Monterey Peninsula Unified School District, the Defense Language Institute, Monterey
Peninsula College, Santa Catalina School, Monterey Institute of International Studies, Naval
Postgraduate School, and other public and private schools.
Goal a. Maintain a Land Use Plan Map to guide future development and land use.
Policy a. 1. Implement the Land Use Plan using the Land Use Plan Map ( Figure 3) and the
following land use categories:
1. Residential. The Residential category is further divided into the following three
sub- categories:
a. Very- Low- Density Residential. This category applies to single- family residential
17
areas where the average density is less than two dwellings per acre. The intent of
this designation is to provide for housing in areas with scenic and natural resources.
Preservation of scenic and natural resources is a primary goal, and project densities
may be within the range as necessary to protect these resources.
b. Low Density Residential. This category applies to single- family residential areas
where the average density is between two to eight dwellings per acre.
c. Medium- Density Residential. This category applies to multiple- family residential
areas where the average density is from eight to thirty dwellings per acre.
Residential land uses in this category include duplexes, condominiums, and
apartments.
2. Public/ Semi- Public. This category applies to all publicly owned facilities and those
private facilities operated to serve the general public except for parks and recreation
facilities, which are a separate category. Included in this category are: public and private
schools, military facilities, the airport, cemetery, large public parking facilities, hospitals,
museums, conference center, and some publicly- owned historic buildings.
3. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space. This category applies to all parks and recreation
facilities such as neighborhood, community and county parks; community centers; and
greenbelt and other open space areas.
4. Industrial. This category applies to existing and future industrial areas in the city.
There are four areas in this category in the Land Use Plan. In most cases, industrial
areas are taking the form of business parks with a combination of office and industrial
uses.
5. Commercial. This category applies to all types of commercial areas and allows the full
range of commercial uses, including retail, office, visitor commercial and professional
offices. Commercial areas are also a primary resource for new housing in mixed use or
apartment developments.
18
Figure 3, Showing Land Use
19
b. Future Population Growth Alternatives
The zoning and the Land Use Plan maps allow more development than is anticipated within the
20- year General Plan period. The Circulation Element roadway capacity is based on a defined
level of residential and employment growth in identified areas. Growth within the levels shown
in Table 1 is consistent with the Circulation Element. A General Plan review for Circulation
Element consistency will be required if growth exceeds 80% of the levels shown in Table 1.
Three alternatives were evaluated for future growth – Baseline market- rate growth ( status quo),
the “ Mixed Use Neighborhood” model, and the larger undeveloped areas South of Highway 1.
This Land Use Element supports the “ Mixed Use Neighborhood” alternative, which is a mix of
residences, retail shops, services and jobs in close proximity. These areas are designed to be
well served by transit and bicycle routes and have a welcoming pedestrian environment. It is
estimated that new development within the identified Mixed Use Neighborhoods will generate at
a minimum 30% fewer automobile trips than the same amount of development elsewhere in the
City. The planned Mixed Use Neighborhoods are the commercial areas of Downtown/ East
Downtown, Cannery Row/ Lighthouse Avenue, and North Fremont Street.
Each mixed use neighborhood is unique. For each mixed use neighborhood, area specific
development and design guidelines, capital improvement programs, and other planning
techniques will be created to encourage this type of development. It is critical that the design
concept maintains the character of the neighborhood and compatibility with the neighborhood's
architecture. Specific issues such as height, bulk, scale, landscaping, parking, setbacks,
streetscapes, and alleys will be addressed in the development and design guidelines. Additional
residential development adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods should be carefully
analyzed by City Commissions to minimize additional traffic and parking problems. It should
also be analyzed for any building height concerns.
Goal b. Direct future population growth into mixed use neighborhoods. The City's goal is to
create and nurture mixed use neighborhoods that: 1) Reduce automobile trips; 2) Improve the
quality of the pedestrian experience; 3) Create walkable neighborhoods; 4) Provide more
ownership opportunities; 5) Increase the stock of housing affordable to Monterey's work force;
6) Require high- quality design to complement Monterey's image; and 7) Improve neighborhood-oriented
services.
Policy b. 1. Create design concepts, development guidelines, and capital improvement
programs for mixed use neighborhoods. Emphasize attractive pedestrian, bicycle and transit
access, which may require improved sidewalks, crosswalks, and various public way
improvements. The City encourages owner occupied units, innovative site planning and
tailoring the design and density to fit with the neighborhood. Mixed use developments are
encouraged to be attractive in design, hide parking from the street, create a pleasant
pedestrian environment, provide a transition into the residential zones through good site
planning and design.
Program b. 1.1. Develop Mixed Use Neighborhood Guidelines for the East Downtown
area as an amendment to the Downtown Area Plan. The intent of the guidelines would
be to provide policy and illustrated design concepts that lead to mixed use or
apartment/ condominium housing for a wide range of incomes to encourage customers
20
and employees to live near downtown. The plan will be to capitalize on the access to
alternative transportation modes, Lake El Estero, the waterfront, downtown, and the
employment center of Monterey. Shared parking, including the potential for public
parking, is encouraged to minimize the amount of land dedicated to parking.
Program b. 1.2. Develop Mixed Use Neighborhood Guidelines for the Downtown area
in the Downtown Area Plan. The goal is to maintain the downtown as the City center.
The intent of the guidelines would be to provide policy and illustrated design concepts
that maintain the pedestrian friendly and historical environment with retail on the
ground floor and housing or other uses above. Encouraged transportation modes include
the shuttle, walking, and bicycles. Shared parking, including the use of private parking
spaces when not needed for their primary use, is encouraged to minimize the amount of
land dedicated to parking. Guidelines should address building height. Height of new
construction should respect neighboring historic buildings.
Program b. 1.3. Develop Mixed Use Neighborhood Guidelines for the Lighthouse,
Foam, Wave and Cannery Row Areas. The goal of these areas is to be a local oriented
commercial and residential destination with a high quality pedestrian experience. The
intent of the guidelines would be to provide policy and illustrated design concepts that
lead to mixed use or apartment/ condominium housing for a wide range of incomes to
encourage customers and employees to live near Lighthouse Avenue and Cannery Row.
Encouraged transportation modes include the shuttle, walking, and bicycle facilities.
Improve inter- block pedestrian connections and access to the Monterey Bay Recreation
Trail. Shared parking, including the potential for public parking, is encouraged in areas
close to public parking lots to minimize the amount of land dedicated to parking.
Guidelines should address shared bay views.
Program b. 1.4. North Fremont Street. Develop Mixed Use Neighborhood Guidelines
for North Fremont Street in the North Fremont Street Area Plan. The plan will
emphasize mixed use development, improved pedestrian experience and connections to
the neighborhood, and bus transportation. Ownership residential units are preferred.
Building sites should provide the required parking or a shared parking plan be
developed due to the limited supply of on- street parking and high traffic volumes along
North Fremont Street. Guidelines should encourage pedestrian activity that will result in
a safe and secure North Fremont Street. Guidelines should address impacts on adjacent
residential areas.
Policy b. 2. Follow the existing policy directions in the Highway 68 Plan and Old Capitol
Site Memorandum of Understanding for residential development south of Highway 1.
Workforce housing on the City owned Ryan Ranch and mixed use housing in the Ryan
Ranch Business Park may be considered in order to provide housing in proximity to a major
employment center.
Policy b. 3. For commercially zoned land not in Mixed Use Neighborhood areas, use
permits for additional stories and parking adjustments are strongly discouraged because
automobile trip generation outside the Mixed Use Neighborhoods is higher.
Policy b. 4. Reinforce the visual, pedestrian, and bicycle connection between City
neighborhoods and the Bay so that residents have exceptional non- automobile access to the Bay.
22
TABLE 1
CITYWIDE ANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
This chart represents the City's best estimate of foreseeable development for the next twenty
years. It is not a maximum calculation of future development.
The Regional Housing Needs Assessment ( RHNA) prepared by the Association of Monterey
Bay Area Governments has identified a future housing need in Monterey of 1,302 new dwelling
units for 2000- 2007. The City's General Plan is required to show adequate sites for the 1,302
units to be in compliance with State law requirements. The City's goal is to provide this housing
in the proposed Mixed Use Neighborhoods which can accommodate higher density housing due
to transit, recreation, and commercial opportunities. A more detailed analysis and discussion of
the RHNA is included in the Housing Element. AMBAG's 20- year forecast for new residential
development in the City is 1,789 housing units. Both the RHNA and estimated 20- year buildout
can be accommodated in the City as demonstrated in the following table.
Anticipated Development Potential
Development
Areas
Dwelling Units
R- 1 District ( 1) 163
R- 3 District ( 2) 500
Commercial/
Industrial Districts
1,302
Defense Language
Institute ( 3)
136
Naval Post
Graduate School
( 4)
34
2,135
Notes:
1) R- 1 development potential anticipates one house per vacant lot.
2) During the past General Plan period ( 1983- 2003), the City gained approximately 500
new multi- family dwelling units. This equals approximately 25 new units annually.
Given the City's incentives and disincentives for residential development, it is
anticipated that 500 new residential units will be the maximum in R- 3 Zoning District.
3 and 4) Telephone Conversations with POM and DLI representatives about proposed
residential development on the POM and DLI. Thirty four housing units are planned
on the Naval Post Graduate School campus, and the Navy is not planning to replace
the housing units removed in the La Mesa Housing village.
23
MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOODS
Proposed Mixed Use
Neighborhoods
Anticipated Dwelling
Units with Mixed Use
Neighborhoods
Incentives
Downtown 456
East Downtown 456
Cannery Row/ Lighthouse 260
North Fremont 130
Total 1,302
Notes:
1) The Downtown/ East Downtown area has the most development potential and is
currently well served by transit. It also contains a variety of commercial and
recreational opportunities. As a result, the majority of new development
( approximately 70%) was assigned to the Downtown/ East Downtown Mixed Use
Neighborhoods.
2) The Cannery Row/ Lighthouse Avenue Mixed Use Neighborhood is within the
current WAVE Shuttle area. However, there are more restrictions to development in
this area due to traffic and parking problems. The Coastal Commission has also
placed a numerical cap of 183 dwelling units in the Cannery Row LCP area. Staff
assumes that 20% of the new development would be slated for this Mixed Use
Neighborhood.
3) The North Fremont area is served by MST but not the WAVE Shuttle. There would
appear to be the greatest need for private investment to make a mixed- use
neighborhood work in this area. This is a longer- term development opportunity for
the City. As a result, staff assigned only 10% of the anticipated new development to
the North Fremont area.
24
Figure 2, Showing Mixed Use Neighborhoods
25
c. Relationship to Area Plans and Implementing Plans
Monterey is a city of neighborhoods, and many residential and commercial neighborhoods
now have Area Plans. In addition there are implementing plans for a variety of City services
such as parks and recreation and bicycle routes. The Area Plans are adopted using the same
hearing and adoption process as the General Plan. In the event of a conflict between the
General Plan and Area Plans, the General Plan is the controlling document; however Area
Plan policies and programs that are more precise but consistent with the General Plan have the
same standing as General Plan policies. Implementing Plans guide specific city actions and
must be consistent with the General Plan, but they do not have the same standing as General
Plan policies. Implementing Plans may be adopted by the Planning Commission or City
Council and do not need to meet state prescribed process for adoption of a General Plan.
Area Plans and Implementing Plans as of 2002 are listed in Table 2.
Policy c. 1. Area Plans shall have the same authority as the General Plan and shall be adopted
using the General Plan notice and public hearing process. Area plans may be more detailed than
General Plan provisions. Where the General Plan provides for a range of housing units, an
Area Plan may specify a density lower than the maximum in the General Plan range if a
consistency determination with the General Plan is reviewed and approved as part of the Area
Plan adoption. The Area Plan must also specify why a lower density is appropriate, such as,
but not limited to, parking and traffic concerns.
Policy c. 2. Implementing Plans provide detailed information for achieving General Plan
policies but do not have General Plan policy level authority. These are implementing tools to
achieve goals specified in General Plan and Area Plans. Implementing Plans require Planning
Commission and City Council public notice and hearing for adoption but may specify that
amendments can be approved by another City Board or Commission. In the absence of such a
provision, Plans shall be amended following the same process as adoption.
26
TABLE 2
CITY OF MONTEREY PLANS
( Note: “ Revised” is a comprehensive revision. “ Amended” is less than a comprehensive change.)
AREA PLANS DATE ADOPTED, UPDATED
Redevelopment Plans -- These plans were prepared under Federal and State legislation to
provide public improvements and encourage private development in Downtown and Cannery
Row.
1. Cannery Row Redevelopment Plan .............................................................................. 1981
2. Custom House Urban Renewal Redevelopment Plan............. Adopted 1965, Revised 1972
3. Greater Downtown Area Redevelopment Plan.............................................................. 1983
Residential Neighborhood Plans -- These plans were prepared for residential areas of the City.
1. Casanova/ Oak Knoll Area Plan ........................................... Adopted 1985, Amended 1991
2. Del Monte Grove Area Plan .......................................................................................... 1978
3. Highway 68 Area Plan ( mainly outside of City Limits).............................. November 1984
4. New Monterey Area Plan ....................................................... Adopted 1980, Revised 1991
5. Oak Grove Area Plan........................................................... Adopted 1990, Amended 1998
Commercial Area Plans -- These plans were prepared for commercial areas of the City.
1. Downtown Area Plan..................................................................................................... 1991
2. East Del Monte Avenue Area Plan ................................................................................ 1986
3. Lighthouse Area Plan..................................................................................................... 1987
4. North Fremont Street Area Plan .................................................................................... 2000
5. Wharf Master Plan ......................................................................................................... 1986
Coastal Plans -- These plans were prepared for segments of the City’s coastal zone.
1. Cannery Row Land Use Plan : City Adopted July 1980, State Adopted November 1981,
Amended 1999, Under Review 2002 ( serves as commercial area plan)
2. Del Monte Beach Land Use Plan : City adopted February 1983, State adopted with
modifications November 1983, Under Review 2002 ( Serves as neighborhood area plan)
3. Harbor Land Use Plan: City Adopted July 1986, State adopted with modifications
November 1983, Under Review 2002
4. Roberts Lake/ Laguna Grande Land Use Plan: City adopted December 1981,
State adopted with modifications March 1982, Under Review 2002
5. Skyline Land Use Plan: City adopted October 1983, State adopted November 1983, Under
Review 2002
IMPLEMENTING PLANS DATE ADOPTED, UPDATED
1. Bikeways Plan...................................................................... Adopted 1983, Amended 2001
2. Library Master Plan .……………............................................................….. Adopted
2001
3. Parks and Recreation Master Plan ...................................... Adopted 1986, Amended 2000
27
Circulation Element
Vision
Monterey will be a City where alternative forms of
transportation are so attractive that the use of an
automobile is a choice, not a necessity. The trans-portation
system will be safe for all users, and support the
local economy while maintaining the historic character of
the City.
28
INTRODUCTION
The primary role of the Circulation Element is to plan the transportation system needed to serve
proposed development as defined in the land- use element of the General Plan. The transportation
system affects the growth patterns, environment, and quality of life of Monterey’s residents and
workers. Much of Monterey’s charm for both residents and visitors springs from its historic
buildings, irregular street pattern, old plazas, and waterfront views. Trying to solve traffic
problems by simply widening roads will negatively impact the quality of life that residents
enjoy. Building expensive parking improvements to serve peak seasonal demand will lead to
facilities being underutilized most of the year when demand is not at peak. This element’s
policies and programs are intended to reduce the overall duration and frequency of traffic congestion
and parking shortages without relying on expansive infrastructure projects. This requires a
transportation system that is easily available, efficient, and well coordinated. The Circulation
Element relies on alternative modes of transportation to reduce auto use but also identifies long-term
roadway solutions along the principal arterial streets.
The Land Use Element and Circulation Element establish a mutually supporting relationship,
with higher- density land uses directed to areas best served by alternative modes of
transportation. The principles of transit- oriented and pedestrian- oriented developments will be
applied to reinforce the use of public transportation and provide an alternative to traditional
suburban development. This in turn allows innovative traffic and parking mitigation measures
that preserve Monterey’s natural and historic environment. To make this work, there must be
exceptional transit service, safe bicycle connections, and attractive pedestrian connections
throughout the city.
Tourism is a vital component of Monterey’s economy. This Circulation Element plans to serve
the mobility needs of visitors with alternative transportation modes to minimize the traffic impacts
on residents. The City of Monterey has successfully used the Waterfront Area Visitor Express
( WAVE) to mitigate summer traffic and parking impacts generated by Cannery Row develop-ment.
The WAVE is currently a fun, fast, and free transit shuttling visitors between the City’s big-gest
tourist attractions and satellite parking in the downtown area. The Circulation Element
includes “ WAVE” service in the “ local transit system.” The Circulation Element recommends
expanded local transit system operation throughout the year to better serve residents, especially
in areas planned for higher- density mixed- use development. Residents will benefit directly from
an expanded local transit system service that provides an attractive alternative to driving a car
around town and introduces a reliable commute alternative for those who work in the
commercial business districts. The proposed system also provides an indirect benefit to residents
by minimizing the traffic impacts of visitors and reducing unwelcome cut- through traffic on
residential streets.
The following Circulation Element goals, policies, and programs assist Monterey in meeting its
goal to be a city where people can circulate without cars.
29
Goals, Policies, and Programs
a. Transportation and Parking
Management Program
The public expectation that roadway
capacity can be increased to relieve traffic
congestion is no longer realistic. The
Circulation Element envisions auto use as a
choice rather than a necessity during the peak
hours of congestion. The policies and
programs in this element provide attractive
alternatives to driving a car.
The City should make the most efficient use
possible of the land devoted to parking. The
city’s overall parking supply is generally
sufficient to meet the demand for all except
for a few peak weeks each year, but
employees and customers often attempt to
avoid parking fees by using free parking
spaces in adjacent residential neighborhoods.
The Transportation and Parking Management
Program is basically comprised of the
Transportation Systems Management ( TSM)
program, Travel Demand Management ( TDM)
program, and Parking Master Plan ( PMP) that
include implementation plans and identify
dedicated funding sources. It is critical to the
city’s economic health that this new
approach not only serves the transportation
needs of the entire community but also
supports visitors arriving in cars.
Goal a. Improve transportation and parking
systems by managing them more effectively
before investing in costly roadway and
parking expansion projects.
Policy a. 1. Adopt a Transportation
Systems Management ( TSM) program to
improve the effectiveness of the
transportation system.
Program a. 1.1. Develop
implementation plans for a traffic-adaptive
signal system that
interconnects and coordinates traffic
signals to optimize the flow of traffic
along the arterial street network.
Program a. 1.2. Develop
implementation plans for directional
and variable message signs ( VMS)
located at the main entrances to the
city directing visitor traffic to parking
supply and uncongested routes.
Program a. 1.3. Develop
implementation plans for dynamic
signs located close to public parking
that display available parking spaces
using real- time information. The signs
should also display the flexible
parking rates developed in the Parking
Master Plan.
Program a. 1.4. Develop
implementation plans for advance
traveler information ( ATI) via the
Internet ( for example, satellite
parking, preferred routes for special
events).
Program a. 1.5. Develop capacity
performance standards for the
Recreation Trail.
Policy a. 2. Adopt a Travel Demand
Management ( TDM) program to reduce
the number of auto trips made during
peak travel times and direct visitors to
attractive transportation alternatives as
they park at satellite sites served by the
local transit system.
Program a. 2.1. Develop an
implementation plan for the local
transit system to serve, at a minimum,
the downtown parking structures and
Cannery Row.
Program a. 2.2. Expand and promote
transit service for residents,
employees, and visitors based on the
City’s traffic monitoring program ( see
Section j).
30
Program a. 2.3. Identify a long- term
funding program for local transit system
service with dedicated revenue sources
( e. g., citywide traffic impact fees,
dedicated sales tax).
Program a. 2.4. Establish incentives to
employers using flexible work schedules.
Program a. 2.5. Provide preferential
treatment to rideshare vehicles ( e. g.,
reserved parking spaces and/ or
reduced parking fees in city lots).
Policy a. 3. Adopt a Parking Master Plan
( PMP) that maximizes occupancy of public
parking spaces to minimize parking impacts
in adjacent residential neighborhoods.
Program a. 3.1. Establish clear
guidelines for providing,
coordinating, and managing parking
in the city according to the policies
and programs identified in the
Parking section of the Circulation
Element.
Program a. 3.2. Develop a plan to
provide for long- term parking needs in
Parking Adjustment Districts.
Program a. 3.3. Identify satellite
parking east of Lighthouse Tunnel to
serve visitors during peak periods of
demand. Develop an implementation
plan that provides local transit system
service to those locations.
Program a. 3.4. Develop parking
requirements in the PMP as well as
in design standards to optimize
parking resources, enhance public
safety, support City businesses, and
encourage increased use of alternative
transportation.
Program a. 3.5. Develop on- site
parking requirements along local
transit system routes that avoid
creating parking impacts on adjacent
residential neighborhoods.
Program a. 3.6. Establish a parking
fee structure for public parking to
promote ( a) use of alternative modes
of transportation while discouraging
personal vehicle trips; ( b) visitor
parking for long periods of time and
use of the local transit system; and
( c) employee use during off- peak
periods without significantly reducing
revenues.
b. Transportation and Land Use
The Land Use and Circulation Elements
establish a mutually supportive relationship.
Higher- density land uses along the main
transportation corridors provide the
ridership needed to support increased transit
service, while alternative mobility strategies
provide access to these land uses. This
growth pattern minimizes traffic impacts
and supports the local economy. The
mobility needs of the community must be
met while preserving natural and historic
resources.
Goal b. Apply land- use planning tools and
strategies that support the city's circulation
goals and direct growth to areas best served
by alternative modes of transportation.
Policy b. 1. Use land- use policies to
concentrate development within walking
distance of the local transit system to
reduce the overall demand for travel and
minimize the traffic impacts of
development.
Program b. 1.1. Develop criteria for
transportation management fees for
projects located within walking
distance of the local transit system.
Program b. 1.2. Encourage master
plans that incorporate
transit/ pedestrian- oriented design
31
( TOD/ POD) standards for areas
planned for development of mixed- use
neighborhoods.
Program b. 1.3. Require new projects
to meet on- site parking standards for
projects located outside of Parking
Adjustment Districts.
Policy b. 2. Encourage developer
agreements for projects located in
Parking Adjustment Districts that fund
alternative modes of transportation.
Program b. 2.1. Once local shuttle
service is established year- round for
morning and afternoon commute
hours, encourage local shuttle service
as the preferred parking and traffic
mitigation for development proposed
within walking distance of that
service.
Policy b. 3. Encourage mixed- use
development to maximize the shared use
of on- site parking spaces.
Policy b. 4. Incorporate retail, office, or
residential community uses into the
design of public parking structures.
Policy b. 5. Expand the WAVE to non-tourist
routes.
Policy b. 6. Do not support non- aviation
uses within the Monterey Peninsula
Airport District that create unnecessary
traffic impacts in adjacent residential
neighborhoods.
c. Roads
Monterey’s street and highway network
provides for the movement of people and
goods into, out of, and through the city. The
street network must do more than simply
serve automobiles; it must continue to be the
place for connection, commerce, and
community. The public expectation that
roadway capacity must be increased to
relieve traffic congestion is no longer
realistic. Most of the drivers caught in
recurring traffic congestion have made the
conscious choice to use an automobile
instead of other alternatives. With the
decision to rethink transportation priorities
and solutions, policies in the previous
Circulation Element were changed. For
example, the previous auto- oriented level of
service ( LOS) standards were adjusted to
promote transit- oriented and pedestrian-oriented
development in areas best served
by alternative modes of transportation ( e. g.,
downtown, Cannery Row, and Lighthouse
areas). Roadway Level of Service standards
will be based on “ typical” peak hour
commute times ( i. e., off- peak, non- summer
months). The following goals, policies, and
programs are, therefore, not intended to
eliminate traffic congestion but rather to
further the Circulation Element Vision.
Goal c. Provide a safe, efficient, well-maintained,
and environmentally sound
roadway system that supports equality of
choice among all modes of transportation.
Policy c. 1. Monitor the transportation
system to determine when transportation
management programs must be
implemented.
Policy c. 2. Continue to work closely with
Army officials to reopen to civilian traffic
at least one route across the Presidio of
Monterey.
Policy c. 3. Identify and implement street
improvements to address high accident
rates for motorists, pedestrians, and
bicyclists, even if such improvements
result in increased traffic congestion.
Program c. 3.1. Reduce unsafe
conflict points on all major and minor
arterial streets by avoiding trap lanes
and providing left- turn lanes at
intersections.
32
Program c. 3.2. Place the highest
priority on projects that reduce high
accident rates.
Program c. 3.3. Develop roadway
safety improvement projects that
result in self- enforcing conditions and
require a minimum amount of signage
in order to reduce driver confusion.
Policy c. 4. Create and maintain a
roadway system that is safe, unobtrusive,
and easy to use for all modes of
transportation.
Program c. 4.1. Consider the needs of
buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians
when planning road improvements.
Program c. 4.2. Update the directional
signage program to primary
destinations.
Policy c. 5. Preserve the city’s character
and valuable resources in future roadway
improvements to the transportation
system.
Program c. 5.1. Respect the character
and type of surrounding land uses
through the design and use of streets.
Program c. 5.2. Preserve natural and
historic resources and maintain scenic
views when siting and developing new
roads.
Program c. 5.3. Incorporate
appropriate landscaped medians,
parkways, signs, utilities, street
furniture, sidewalks, and bicycle lanes
into transportation projects.
Program c. 5.4. Maintain the major
entrances to the city as scenic,
landscaped corridors.
Program c. 5.5. Establish landscaped
greenbelt areas along the borders of
scenic highways.
Policy c. 6. Implement a street
classification system ( Map 5 and Table 3)
that identifies the functions of streets
according to the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation
Officials ( AASHTO) street
classifications.
Program c. 6.1. Limit direct access
from private property to State
highways.
Program c. 6.2. Through- traffic
movement along major arterial streets
takes precedence over access to
adjacent land uses and traffic access
from side streets.
Program c. 6.3. Avoid mid- block
median openings and direct driveway
access for individual properties along
major arterial streets.
Program c. 6.4. Design minor arterial
streets to carry traffic along the fringe
of and around residential
neighborhoods.
Program c. 6.5. Discourage and
impede through traffic on local streets
through residential neighborhoods.
Program c. 6.6. Carry the local transit
routes on minor arterial streets.
Program c. 6.7. Provide direct access
to adjacent land uses and circulation
within residential neighborhoods and
commercial districts on collector
streets.
Policy c. 7. Continue to maintain streets
using the City’s Pavement Management
System ( PMS).
Policy c. 8. Minimize traffic impacts in
residential neighborhoods by routing
truck and through traffic onto highways
and arterial streets, even where such
33
routing is not the shortest distance
between two points.
Program c. 8.1. Implement the truck
route system ( Map 7 and Table 4) by
posting truck route signage directing
truck traffic around residential areas.
Program c. 8.2. Implement the visitor
route system ( Map 6 and Table 5).
Policy c. 9. Implement design and self-enforcing
solutions rather than traffic
control devices to slow and discourage
through traffic in residential areas.
Program c. 9.1. Encourage
implementation of the adopted City
Traffic Calming Program.
Program c. 9.2. Install traffic calming
devices ( e. g., textured crosswalks,
landscaped medians) according to
adopted neighborhood traffic calming
plans.
Program c. 9.3. Limit the use of speed
limit signs and warning signs to alert
motorists to conditions or laws that
aren’t obvious.
Policy c. 10. Complete the widening of
Del Monte Avenue.
Policy c. 11. Improve traffic flow on Del
Monte Avenue at Washington Street.
Program c. 11.1 Install an attractive
landscape median at the intersection of
Washington Street and Del Monte
Avenue to restrict pedestrians and
vehicles from crossing Del Monte
Avenue. Include operational
improvements to Figueroa Street and
converting Tyler Street to two- way
between Del Monte Avenue and
Franklin Street.
Program c. 11.2 Improve the
pedestrian connection from
Washington Street and Del Monte
Avenue to the Alvarado Mall.
Program c. 11.3 To better link the
Downtown with the waterfront,
construct an attractive pedestrian
bridge between Spanish Plaza and the
Wharf parking lot to provide a direct
bicycle connection from Downtown to
the Recreation Trail.
Policy c. 12. Maintain two- way traffic on
Lighthouse Avenue to enhance the
pedestrian experience and business
environment and improve traffic safety.
Program c. 12.1. Implement a capital
improvement project to design, fund
and operate a long- term traffic
solution for Lighthouse Avenue.
Policy c. 13. Support capacity
improvements on State highways because
these routes are the primary entrances
into the City.
Program c. 13.1. Support Holman
Highway 68 widening to four lanes
along the entire length. The design of
this project should minimize impacts
along the ridgeline and to the forested
environment.
Program c. 13.2. Support Monterey-
Salinas Highway 68 widening to four
lanes of expressway or a new off-alignment
bypass facility.
Program c. 13.3. Support Highway 1
widening to six lanes between
Highway 218 and the Fremont
Boulevard interchange in Sand City.
Program c. 13.4. Support State
Highway 156 widening to four lanes
from Highway 1 to Highway 101.
Policy c. 14. Implement operational
improvements on major arterial streets so
34
that traffic can safely enter the city
without backing up on Highway 1.
Program c. 14.1. Improve the
intersection operations of Fremont
Street Interchange and Camino
Aguajito to maximize flow along the
major arterial and reduce congestion.
Policy c. 15. Continue to coordinate
with Caltrans and TAMC to identify
improvements and funding for
improvements to Highway 1, Highway
68 and other locations within the City
deemed important to the function of
the regional transportation network so
that the level of service standards for
such facilities are met.
35
Table 3. Functional Street Classifications
Major Arterial Streets
Street Limits
Aguajito Road Fremont Street to Mark Thomas Drive/ Highway 1 NB Exit Ramp
Del Monte Avenue Lighthouse Avenue/ Washington Street to East City Limit
Foam Street Lighthouse Avenue to Reeside Avenue
Fremont Street Highway 1/ Aguajito Road to Camino El Estero
Lighthouse Avenue Washington/ Del Monte Avenue to Reeside Avenue
Soledad Drive Munras Avenue to Barnett Segal Drive/ Viejo
Minor Arterial Streets
Street Limits
Abrego Street Eldorado Street to Pearl Street/ Washington Street
Camino El Estero Del Monte Avenue to Franklin Street
David Avenue Wave Street to Devisadero Street ( West City Limit)
Del Monte Avenue Washington Street to Pacific Street
English Avenue Del Monte Avenue to Highway 1 NB Exit Ramp
Figueroa Street Franklin Street to Del Monte Avenue
Foam Street Reeside Avenue to David Avenue
Franklin Street Pacific Street to Camino El Estero
Fremont Street Camino El Estero to Munras Avenue
Lighthouse Avenue Reeside Avenue to Central Avenue ( North City Limit)
Munras Avenue Fremont Street to Alvarado Street
Munras Avenue Eldorado Street/ Abrego Street to Highway 1 SB Ramps
North Fremont Street Highway 1 to East City Limits
Olmsted Drive Monterey/ Salinas Highway ( SR68) to Monterey Peninsula Airport
Entrance
Pacific Street Lighthouse Avenue to Soledad Drive
Soledad Drive Pacific Street to Munras Avenue
Tyler Street Lighthouse Avenue to Franklin Street
Washington Street Pearl Street to Del Monte Avenue
36
Table 3. Functional Street Classifications Continued
Collector Streets
Street Limits
Aguajito Road Highway 1 to Monhollan Road
Airport Road Monterey Peninsula Airport to North Fremont Street
Alvarado Street Munras Avenue to Del Monte Avenue
Barnett Segal Drive Soledad Drive to Iris Canyon Road
Camino Aguajito Del Monte Avenue to Fremont Street
Camino El Estero Franklin Street to Fremont Street
Casa Verde Way Del Monte Avenue to Fairground Road
Del Monte Avenue Pacific Street to Van Buren Street
Drake Avenue Wave Street to Lighthouse Avenue
Eldorado Street Munras Avenue to Pacific Street
English Avenue Highway 1 NB Exit Ramp to Montecito Avenue
Fairground Road Airport Road to Garden Road
Franklin Street Pacific Street to Presidio of Monterey Entrance
Garden Road Fairground Road to Olmsted Road
Glenwood Circle Aguajito Road/ Via Lavandera to Iris Canyon Road
Hawthorne Street Reeside Avenue to Line Street/ North City Limit
Herrmann Drive Larkin Street/ Madison Street to Via Del Rey
High Street Presidio of Monterey Entrance to Jefferson Street
Hoffman Street Wave Street to Lighthouse Avenue
Jefferson Street Pearl Street to Veterans Drive
Josselyn Canyon Road Mark Thomas Drive to Monterey/ Salinas Highway ( SR68)
Madison Street Larkin Street/ Herrmann Drive to Calle Principal
Mar Vista Drive Monte Vista Drive to Skyline Drive ( south intersection)
Mar Vista Drive Soledad Drive ( north intersection) to Skyline Drive
Mark Thomas Drive Aguajito Road to Garden Road
Martin Street Pacific Street to Via Gayuba/ San Bernabe Drive
Monhollan Road Within City Limits
Monte Vista Drive Mar Vista Drive to Soledad Drive
Montecito Avenue English Avenue to Casa Verde Way
37
Table 3. Functional Street Classifications Continued
Collector Streets ( continued)
Street Limits
Olmsted Road Monhollan Road to Monterey/ Salinas Highway ( SR68)
Pearl Street Munras Avenue to Camino Aguajito
Pine Street Line Street ( North City Limit) to Pvt. Bolio Road
Polk Street Calle Principal to Alvarado Street/ Munras Avenue
Prescott Avenue Devisadero Street/ West City Limits to Wave Street
Ragsdale Drive Monterey/ Salinas Highway ( SR68) to Lower Ragsdale Drive
Reeside Avenue Cannery Row to Hawthorne Street
Rancho Saucito Road Upper Ragsdale Drive to South Boundary Road
Skyline Drive Mar Vista Drive ( south intersection) to Veterans Drive
Skyline Forest Drive Skyline Drive to Holman Highway ( SR68)
Sloat Avenue Mark Thomas Drive to Del Monte Avenue
Soledad Drive Mar Vista Drive to Pacific Street
South Boundary Road York Road to West City Limit
Taylor Street Prescott Avenue to Presidio of Monterey Entrance
Third Street Camino Aguajito to Sloat Avenue
Van Buren Street Del Monte Avenue to Madison Street
Veterans Drive Jefferson Street to Skyline Drive
Via Gayuba San Bernabe Drive/ Martin Street to Mar Vista Drive
Wilson Road York Road to Lower Ragsdale Drive
York Road Monterey/ Salinas Highway ( SR68) to South Boundary Road
Proposed Road Connect Airport Road to Garden Road
38
Table 4. Truck Routes
Street Limits
Truck
Parking
Abrego Street Eldorado Street to Pearl Street/ Washington Street Yes
Aguajito Road Fremont Street to Mark Thomas Drive/ Highway 1 NB Exit
Ramp
Yes
Camino El Estero Del Monte Avenue to Franklin Street Yes
David Avenue Wave Street to Devisadero Street ( West City Limit) No
Del Monte
Avenue
Pacific Street to East City Limit Yes
English Avenue Del Monte Avenue to Highway 1 NB Exit Ramp Yes
Figueroa Street Franklin Street to Commercial Wharf II Yes
Foam Street Lighthouse Avenue to David Avenue Yes
Franklin Street Pacific Street to Camino El Estero Yes
Fremont Street Highway 1/ Aguajito Road to Abrego Street Yes
Hannon Avenue Del Monte Avenue to Highway 1 SB Entrance Ramp Yes
Lighthouse
Avenue
Washington/ Del Monte Avenue to North City Limit Yes
Munras Avenue Eldorado Street/ Abrego Street to Highway 1 SB Ramps Yes
North Fremont
Street
Highway 1 to East City Limit Yes
Olmsted Drive Monterey/ Salinas Highway ( SR68) to Monterey Peninsula
Airport Entrance
Yes
Pacific Street Lighthouse Avenue to Franklin Street Yes
Soledad Drive Munras Avenue to Highway 1 NB Entrance Ramp No
Tyler Street Lighthouse Avenue to Franklin Street Yes
Washington
Street
Pearl Street/ Abrego Street to Del Monte Avenue Yes
39
Table 5. Visitor Routes
Street Limits
Abrego Street Eldorado Street to Pearl Street/ Washington Street
Aguajito Road Fremont Street to Mark Thomas Drive/ Highway 1 NB Exit
Ramp
Alvarado Street Munras Avenue to Del Monte Avenue
Camino El Estero Fremont Street to Del Monte Avenue
David Avenue Wave Street to Devisadero Street ( West City Limit)
Del Monte Avenue Pacific Street to East City Limits
Foam Street Lighthouse Avenue to David Avenue
Fremont Street Highway 1/ Aguajito Road to Munras Avenue
Lighthouse Avenue Washington/ Del Monte Avenue to North City Limit
North Fremont Street Highway 1 to East City Limits
Munras Avenue Fremont Street to Alvarado Street
Munras Avenue Eldorado Street/ Abrego Street to Highway 1 SB Ramps
Pacific Street Lighthouse Avenue to Del Monte Avenue
Soledad Drive Munras Avenue to Highway 1 NB Entrance Ramp
Washington Street Pearl Street/ Abrego Street to Del Monte Avenue
40
d. Bicycle & Pedestrian Circulation
Attractive bicycle and pedestrian routes are
important throughout the city so that
residents and visitors can use alternative
forms of transportation without feeling
inconvenienced. With its manageable scale,
good weather, and historic attractions,
Monterey is an excellent setting for
bicycling and walking trips by residents and
visitors alike, especially near the waterfront.
Walking is clean, easy on the infrastructure,
healthy for the individual, and integral to
community livability. People who walk
know their neighbors and their
neighborhood. A community that is
designed to support walking is livable and
attractive. Monterey has a history of
creating wonderful pedestrian paths and bike
routes. The city’s Recreation Trail runs the
entire length of Monterey’s waterfront and
provides excellent coastal access for
bicyclists and pedestrians. The Recreation
Trail forms the backbone of the city’s
bicycle and pedestrian network and is
enjoyed by thousands of residents and
visitors each day.
Goal d. Promote a pedestrian/ bicycle-friendly
environment where public spaces,
streets, and off- street paths offer a level of
convenience, safety, and attractiveness that
encourage and reward the use of alternative
modes of transportation.
Policy d. 1. Build on the success of the
Recreation Trail to make walking and
bicycling through Monterey safe and
enjoyable.
Program d. 1.1. Implement and
maintain the continuous network of
safe and convenient bikeways
specified in the City’s Bikeways Plan
to provide a viable alternative to
making short auto trips.
Program d. 1.2. Install adequate
lighting along Class I bike trails.
Program d. 1.3. Plan and support a
continuous east west Class I/ Class II
bikeway that connects the Monterey
Peninsula with Salinas.
Program d. 1.4. Enhance public
awareness of bicycling laws and the
proper use of bikeways through
enforcement, bicycle safety programs,
and bikeway design.
Policy d. 2. Provide ample space on the
Recreation Trail to reduce conflicts
between different users, including
bicyclists, in- line skaters, non- motorized
scooters, pedestrians, and surreys.
Program d. 2.1. Maintain a minimum
width of 6.7 meters ( 22 feet) on high-volume
segments and a minimum
width of 4.3 meters ( 14 feet) on other
segments.
Program d. 2.2. Limit the number of
surreys that may be rented for use on
the Recreation Trail at any one time.
Policy d. 3. Create an integrated, safe, and
convenient pedestrian system connecting
city neighborhoods, schools, recreation
areas, commercial areas, and places of
interest.
Program d. 3.1. Install sidewalks and
paths to complete a continuous
pedestrian network throughout the
community.
Program d. 3.2. Provide sidewalks
with a minimum width of 1.8 meters
( 6 feet) for a pleasant pedestrian and
wheelchair environment in
commercial business districts.
Program d. 3.3. Provide amenities for
alternative transportation methods,
41
such as bicycles, scooters, and mopeds
in the commercial districts and along
the Recreational Trail ( e. g., special
parking places, bicycle racks, storage
lockers, etc.).
Program d. 3.4. Provide residential
sidewalks with a minimum usable
width of .9 meters ( 3 feet) for Special
Needs Groups.
Policy d. 4. Establish and maintain
pedestrian- friendly environments in
commercial areas.
Program d. 4.1. Require newly
proposed developments in commercial
areas to provide sidewalks or
pedestrian connections to surrounding
areas, adjacent transit facilities, and/ or
other travel facilities during
development review.
Program d. 4.2. Underground utilities
in commercial business districts to
maintain adequate space for
pedestrians and to improve the
shopping environment.
Program d. 4.3. Create an attractive
pedestrian environment by providing
“ buffers” separating pedestrians and
vehicular traffic ( e. g., street trees, on-street
parking, and public furniture).
Program d. 4.4. Improve pedestrian
circulation in the downtown area by
improving pedestrian connections
between Calle Principal and
Washington Streets.
Program d. 4.5. Improve pedestrian
circulation between Cannery Row and
Lighthouse Avenue.
Policy d. 5. Design intersections to
improve pedestrian safety, minimize
pedestrian crossing distances, and reduce
signal time needed to serve non- vehicle
movements.
Program d. 5.1. Install curb
extensions to minimize the time
needed for pedestrians to cross busy
streets.
Program d. 5.2. Provide sidewalk curb
ramps in all major activity areas and
commercial centers in accordance
with the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Policy d. 6. Develop pedestrian and
bicycle paths in hillside and other open-space
areas as part of the regional trail
system and/ or as links between major
greenbelt and recreation areas.
Policy d. 7. Cooperate with other
Peninsula cities to complete the Monterey
Bay Coastal Trail as planned, including
connections to parks and green belts.
Policy d. 8. Maintain designated bicycle
routes as attractive and safe
transportation facilities that provide a
viable alternative to auto travel into and
throughout the city.
Program d. 8.1. Encourage bike
lanes, bike racks, bike lockers,
employee shower and changing
facilities in new developments.
Policy d. 9. Maintain the Recreation Trail
as an attractive and safe recreation
facility along the waterfront area that also
provides a critical link for non- auto travel
throughout the city.
Program d. 9.1. Update the City’s
Bikeways Plan to include a Class I or
Class II bike route connecting each
neighborhood to the Recreation Trail.
Program d. 9.2. Include a Class II bike
route connecting Fremont Street to the
42
Recreation Trail along the Camino
Aguajito alignment in the City’s
Bikeways Plan.
Policy d. 10. Support efforts by regional
and state agencies to establish bike and
pedestrian paths along Monterey/ Salinas
Highway ( Highway 68).
e. Parking
Parking conditions and policies influence
residents’ and visitors’ perceptions of
commercial areas and visitor attractions,
which can have a great impact on the local
economy. Providing too much parking in the
downtown, Wharf, and Cannery Row areas
results in an underutilization of valuable land.
In planning for parking needs, it is important
to maintain an attractive, pedestrian- oriented
environment while accommodating the space
needs of the automobile. By doing so, the
City can plan for future parking demand
while supporting Monterey’s businesses and
improving the quality of life here. On- site
parking requirements are a major issue in
areas where the City provides public parking.
This means that an increasing number of
drivers will not be able to park at a
convenient location near their destination. In
support of economic goals, the City will
endeavor to supply appropriate parking to
meet the diverse needs of the business
community. Shared parking, a system where
different users with staggered peak parking
requirements can share the same parking
facility, is an efficient strategy for optimizing
Monterey’s existing parking supply.
Goal e. Optimize the use of Monterey’s
existing parking supply to minimize the
amount of land dedicated to parking needs,
especially in commercial business districts
and along the scenic coastline.
Policy e. 1. Explore opportunities to
provide additional parking to serve
employees in the south Downtown.
Policy e. 2. Study the use of assessment
districts to fund and develop new parking
solutions where shortages exist ( for
example, the Cass / Eldorado Area).
Policy e. 3. Establish appropriate time
limits for parking in commercial business
districts to support local businesses and
encourage use of the local shuttle.
Policy e. 4. Survey land uses, public
parking supplies, and available alternative
modes of transportation prior to
considering changes in parking
requirements.
Policy e. 5. Design attractive pedestrian
ways through parking lots to enable
pedestrians to reach their destinations in a
safe manner.
Policy e. 6. Establish locations for visitor
recreational vehicle parking that are served
by the local shuttle.
Policy e. 7. Major special events with
limited parking should provide direct and
affordable transit service to satellite
parking locations.
Policy e. 8. Identify affordable employee
parking locations in the downtown and
Cannery Row areas to minimize the
impacts on residential neighborhoods.
Program e. 8.1. Identify and develop
peripheral and satellite parking
facilities for employees. Work with
businesses to fund the construction
and maintenance of parking facilities,
and to develop shuttle service where
necessary.
Program e. 8.2. Work with employers
in business districts to offer incentives
for employees to take transit, ride
bikes, or walk to work or to park in
designated areas.
43
Policy e. 9. Improve utilization of existing
parking and create new parking
opportunities through partnerships and
cooperation in order to meet parking
needs with fewer total spaces.
Program e. 9.1. Rely on shared
parking to minimize the number of
parking spaces left unoccupied during
peak demand.
Program e. 9.2. Work with businesses
and churches to make on- site parking
spaces available for the general public
during hours those parking spaces
would otherwise be unused.
Program e. 9.3. Create joint- use
agreements to share parking at existing
facilities for the use of new
developments at locations with
complementary parking patterns ( e. g.,
residential and office).
Program e. 9.4. Dedicate van/ carpool
parking spaces in public parking lots
based on demand.
Program e. 9.5. Dedicate motorcycle
parking spaces in public parking lots
and on- street where feasible.
Program e. 9.6. If existing parking lots
are developed with new construction,
investigate opportunities to replace the
lost parking spaces.
Program e. 9.7. Investigate
partnerships with public and private
entities for multi- purpose parking
facilities.
Policy e. 10. Reduce employee and
student parking spillover into
neighborhoods using residential permit
parking.
Program e. 10.1. Establish or expand
residential permit parking areas where
parking occupancy levels exceed 70%
of capacity and a majority of
residences have signed a petition
supporting proposed permit.
Program e. 10.2. Periodically review
neighborhoods with residential permit
parking programs to maximize the
effectiveness of the program.
Program e. 10.3. Increase the parking
supply in the New Monterey Parking
Adjustment District and reinstate the
transportation management fee.
f. Transit
Transit serves special transportation needs,
providing a means for all residents to
actively participate in the community.
Senior citizens, disabled individuals, and
people without a personal vehicle must rely
on transit as a vital link to jobs, shopping,
education, and health care. As Monterey’s
population continues to age, demand is
likely to grow for special transportation
services providing mobility for those with
disabilities who are not able to own a
personal automobile or use regular transit
services. Monterey- Salinas Transit ( MST) is
the principal public transit operator serving
Monterey. MST is a joint powers agency
with a board of directors that includes a rep-resentative
from the City of Monterey.
Thirteen of MST’s 27 fixed bus routes
operate in Monterey, serving a large part of
the city. The hub of MST’s transit service in
Monterey is Simoneau Plaza, the downtown
transfer center for all routes serving the
Monterey Peninsula. Senior and disabled
passengers can use MST fixed- route and
Direct Area Response Transit ( DART), a
demand- responsive service providing
flexible service between low- density areas
and MST’s trunk lines and transit centers.
MST also operates the RIDES program,
which serves individuals with disabilities
who are not able to use regular transit
service.
44
The City of Monterey supports
improvements to the transit system
throughout the city. Convenient transit
service strengthens the fabric of our
community, regardless of the number of
riders on a particular bus line. The City
acknowledges those indirect benefits to the
community through its traffic impact fee
program. Overly expensive transit fares ( in
comparison with the indirect taxes imposed
on automobile use) discourage transit use. It
is no more reasonable to expect transit to
“ pay its way” with the farebox than it is to
expect automobile drivers to bear the
complete costs of using the roadway and
highway systems. The following goals,
policies, and programs are intended to
dramatically increase the convenience of
public transit throughout the city.
Goal f. Provide an attractive and convenient
transit service for Monterey citizens, espe-cially
those in the community who can not
or choose not to own a private automobile.
Policy f. 1. Work with MST to operate
transit on the city’s principal arterial
streets, maintaining an average headway
that does not exceed 20 minutes during
the a. m. and p. m. peak commute hours.
Policy f. 2. Work with MST to keep fares
low enough to obtain consistently high
patronage and encourage more off- peak
use.
Policy f. 3. Use MST’s demand- responsive
DART service to provide service to low-density
areas. Expand DART service
within the city where flexible routing is
justified.
Policy f. 4. Identify funding for fare
subsidies or transit pass programs ( e. g.,
employer fee program to fund transit in
lieu of providing on- site parking spaces,
transit pass program for schools and large
employers, senior and youth discount
passes, youth ridership programs to
increase weekend and nighttime ridership).
Policy f. 5. Give transit vehicles priority
over other vehicles.
Policy f. 6. Work with MST and area
jurisdictions to improve transit links
between residential areas and areas of
major city employment.
Policy f. 7. Improve and develop safe,
convenient, and protected transit facilities
that are compatible in design with the
surrounding area.
Program f. 7.1. Require developers to
provide transit amenities in
accordance with the MST
Development Review Guidebook.
Program f. 7.2. Work with MST to
provide and maintain attractive
amenities, such as benches, shelters,
lighting, news racks, decorative
trashcans, and bicycle parking at
transit stops.
Program f. 7.3. Work with MST to
continue to provide clear and easy- to-understand
route information, maps,
and other computerized transit
information systems at transit stops
and on the City’s Web site.
Policy f. 8. Continue to provide cost-efficient,
reliable transportation services
to individuals with disabilities for whom
the use of fixed- route public transit is
difficult.
Program f. 8.1. Work with MST to
maintain the RIDES paratransit
service.
Program f. 8.2. Provide information
about the RIDES program on the
City’s Web site and in appropriate city
publications.
45
g. Economic Considerations
Efficient movement of people and goods is
critical to the economic health of Monterey.
The transportation system provides
invaluable services to the business
community by allowing customers access to
commercial areas and allowing businesses to
deliver and receive goods. A key to
economic vitality is maintaining and
enhancing the connection between
businesses and their customers,
acknowledging that the pedestrian
environment around a business is often more
important than the traffic flow in front of a
store. By increasing the use of alternative
modes of transportation and reducing
reliance on the automobile for commuting to
work, business areas will be able to improve
access and the availability of parking for
customers, thereby enhancing economic
vitality. Further development of the
transportation system should improve access
and the mobility of people throughout the
community and strengthen this relationship.
Goal g. Provide a transportation system that
supports the local economy.
Policy g. 1. Provide pedestrian- friendly
environments in the commercial business
districts to extend the time spent in the
commercial business districts and
enhance the overall shopping experience.
Policy g. 2. Do not allow auto- oriented
level- of- service standards to negatively
affect the shopping experience in
commercial business districts.
Policy g. 3. Direct visitor traffic entering
the City on Fremont to use routes through
downtown during off- peak times.
Policy g. 3. a Direct traffic leaving
Cannery Row to use David Avenue to go
to Highway 1.
Policy g. 4. Improve pedestrian experience
in commercial areas.
Program g. 4.1 Implement attractive
streetscape designs and improve
pedestrian and bicycle connections to
the Recreation Trail.
Program g. 4.2 Provide visual cues to
draw pedestrians and bicyclists toward
commercial areas along pedestrian and
bicycle paths.
Policy g. 5. Utilize the local transit system
to serve the commercial business districts,
providing visitors the best opportunity to
enjoy local businesses.
Policy g. 6. Improve the pedestrian
environment along North Fremont Street.
Program g. 6.1 Prepare and
implement a North Fremont
Streetscape Study.
Policy g. 7. Improve the connection
between Downtown and the Waterfront
through the Alvarado Mall.
Program g. 7.1. Work with the
business community to provide a
visual extension of Alvarado Street.
Program g. 7.2. Make Alvarado Mall
and Portola Plaza visually interesting
places with activities that attract tourists
and local residents.
h. Attractive Visitor Transportation
Program ( WAVE)
A key element of a tourist- friendly
environment is avoiding the need for visitors
to plan their transportation so they can
simply go places and enjoy their visit. The
limited parking supply near Cannery Row
and roadway capacity through Lighthouse
Tunnel limits the number of visitors that can
46
drive and park near the region’s biggest
tourist attraction, the Monterey Bay
Aquarium. As part of the coordinated
transportation system, information devices
will direct visitors to satellite parking sites
east of the Lighthouse Tunnel served by the
local transit system and connecting with the
city’s primary tourist destinations. Residents
are directly affected by traffic congestion
caused by visitors making trips in their cars.
Traffic congestion on the primary tourist
routes indirectly affects residents when
locals start using alternative routes through
residential neighborhoods, especially during
the summer tourist season. Visitors are more
likely to use alternative modes of
transportation than residents are. The short
trips made by visitors are ideally suited for
transit, especially if the trip enhances their
experience of Monterey. This Circulation
Element therefore targets programs directed
at getting visitors out of their cars to
minimize these traffic impacts on residents.
Goal h. Make public transportation in the
City of Monterey an attractive alternative
for tourists.
Policy h. 1. Provide an exceptional local
shuttle, scenic bicycle routes, and
attractive pedestrian paths.
Program h. 1.1. Use unique “ niche”
vehicles in the local transit system to
differentiate this program from typical
public transit service.
Program h. 1.2. Create an attractive
pedestrian environment on Del Monte
Avenue near the downtown parking
structures to encourage visitors to
walk to the downtown and
Fisherman’s Wharf.
Program h. 1.3. Plan interactive,
“ smart” kiosks at the major parking
structure exits to provide real- time
shuttle information ( i. e., schedule,
vehicle tracking information,
attractions near stops) using
innovative technology to maximize the
user- friendly benefits of the local transit
system.
Program h. 1.4. Add public art along
popular tourist routes to enhance the
pedestrian experience, accentuate
culture, and maintain the historic
character of Monterey.
Program h. 1.5. Provide comfortable
seating with interpretive signs at
adequate spacing along the Recreation
Trail and other popular pedestrian
routes.
Program h. 1.6. Expand and enhance
the “ Path of History,” including new
paths along Cannery Row and Lower
Presidio.
Policy h. 2. Adopt a taxi operations plan
to ensure fair pricing, qualified drivers,
clean and efficient service, especially to
tourist destinations, hotels and the
airport.
i. Rail and Air Transportation
The city’s primary gateways are congested
highways. Traffic on Highways 1, 68, and 156
currently exceeds capacity. The development of
alternative transportation connections to
Monterey, coordinated with transit and other
alternative transportation improvements within
the city, can benefit Monterey by limiting the
hours of congestion, improving air quality, and
improving safety for motorists and pedestrians.
Direct rail service serving the San Francisco
Bay Area can provide a vital connection to
Monterey visitor attractions, benefiting
residents as well. The Transportation Agency
for Monterey County ( TAMC) is currently
working to fund a new direct rail service to
the Monterey Peninsula. No direct inter- city
rail service is currently provided to the
47
Monterey Peninsula. Amtrak operates a bus
service between Monterey and the Diridon
Rail Station in San Jose, providing
connections to CalTrain and Amtrak’s
Capitol Corridor passenger rail service.
Amtrak service is also offered from Salinas
with MST bus service to the Monterey
Peninsula.
Air transportation is an important regional
mode of travel, connecting travelers to
national as well as international destinations.
Linking passenger and commercial air
service with a multi- modal ground
transportation system throughout the city
can serve the mobility needs of residents and
visitors, while reducing automobile trips.
The City must actively work through the
Airport District liaison, however, to ensure
air transportation service does not adversely
impact residential neighborhoods.
Commercial and general aviation air service is
currently provided to the Monterey Peninsula at
the Monterey Peninsula Airport. National
airlines and smaller feeder airlines serve the
airport. Service is primarily provided to San
Francisco and Los Angeles.
Goal i. Support the movement of people,
goods, and services by other transportation
facilities, such as air, rail, and water.
Policy i. 1. Work with the Airport District
and the hospitality industry to provide a
direct and affordable transit service
between the Monterey Peninsula Airport
and the local shuttle service area to
reduce congestion.
Policy i. 2. Protect the potential for future rail
transportation by supporting the efforts of the
Transportation Agency for Monterey County
( TAMC) to provide additional passenger rail
service to the urban centers.
Program i. 2.1. Plan to expand the local
shuttle service area to nearby proposed
rail stations.
Program i. 2.2. Require grade
separation crossings at all locations
where rail service crosses a Class I bike
route or the Recreation Trail.
Program i. 2.3. Require grade
separation crossings at all locations
where rail service intersects with a
major or minor arterial street.
Policy i. 4. Provide safe crossings for
bicycle and pedestrian trail and vehicle
crossings along the rail line.
Program i. 4.1. Restrict at- grade
railroad crossings of proposed rail
service within the City.
Policy i. 5. Maintain the ability to restore
rail service to the Monterey Peninsula.
Program i. 5.1. Consider the
compatibility of proposed land use
developments with the establishment
of future rail service into the City of
Monterey.
Policy i. 6. Balance the community’s need
for air transportation service with
community safety and environmental
needs.
Policy i. 7. Direct vehicular traffic
generated by airport land uses to arterial
streets and highways and away from
residential neighborhoods.
Program i. 7.1. Work with the Airport
District to implement alternatives to
the use of Airport Road as an access
road for non- aviation uses on the
Airport grounds.
Policy i. 8. Provide affordable shuttle
service to the Monterey Peninsula
Airport.
48
Policy i. 9. Prohibit land- use activities
that interfere with the safe operation of
aircraft using the airport.
Policy i. 10. Support improvements and
operational changes at the airport that
promote safety and noise reduction.
Program i. 10.1. Actively work with
the Airport District to maintain air
service curfews.
Policy i. 11. Plan for a multimodal facility
in central Monterey that supports and
encourages the use of long- range buses
and airport shuttles, as well as local
transit.
j. Monitoring
Monitoring allows the City to determine how
much progress is being made toward achieving
the Circulation Element Vision Statement. The
Circulation Element is a long- range guide
for the maintenance and improvement of the
transportation system. Implementation of
Circulation Element goals must be
accomplished through a three- phased
process of ( 1) establishing defined
benchmarks or objectives, ( 2) monitoring
and measuring policy impacts and results,
and ( 3) developing response strategies
should the City begin moving in a direction
away from the Vision Statement. Continual
collection of data analyzing how the different
pieces of the transportation system are
performing is critical to ensuring its efficient
operation. The monitoring program must
include strong language, identify funding
sources when possible, and provide time
lines for each program. Each policy and goal
should have an associated program that
assures corrective actions are taken if the
City determines that it is not moving toward
its goals.
Automobile levels of service ( LOS) for a
roadway facility generally fall into six letter-grade
levels, with “ A” describing smooth
traffic flow and “ F” describing the lowest
( gridlock). LOS F occurs when too many
users want to use the facility at the same
time. When looking at other modes of
transportation ( e. g., bicycle, transit, and
pedestrian), poor service generally indicates
too few users of the facility, that is, only
those who absolutely have to bicycle will do
so due to safety concerns, inconvenience, or
inadequate facilities. The monitoring
program will incorporate service standards
that balance the assessment of how the
transportation system is operating.
The policies in the Land Use Element
concentrate growth in the local shuttle
service area to take advantage of transit
service throughout the city.
Goal j. Measure the effectiveness of the
transportation system and its ability to safely
move people and goods, not simply vehicles.
Policy j. 1. Monitor changes in traffic
volumes and mobility choices to assure
that the community is moving toward the
Circulation Element Vision. The
Roadway Level of Service ( LOS)
Standard will apply to average ( non-summer)
conditions.
Program j. 1.1. Develop and manage
the city roadway system using a Level
of Service standard of LOS = D on
roadway segments that do not
adequately serve alternative modes of
transportation as shown in Table 6.
Program j. 1.2. Accept level of
service ( LOS) standard LOS = E and
LOS = F on roadway segments that
are adequately served by alternative
modes of transportation as shown in
Table 6.
Policy j. 2. Require an analysis of the
effects of transportation for projects that
may cause significant traffic impacts.
49
Program j. 2.1. Define the traffic
impact study area to be analyzed as all
roadway segments where project
traffic is expected to increase the
existing traffic by two percent ( 2%) or
more.
Program j. 2.2. Define a project’s
traffic impact as significant if the
roadway segment is expected to
operate at LOS = E or LOS = F under
cumulative traffic conditions during
typical ( i. e., non- summer) weekday
traffic conditions.
Policy j. 3. Require projects to build or
fund a pro- rata share toward
improvements necessary to mitigate
significant traffic impacts.
Program j. 3.1. Adopt a traffic impact
fee ordinance used to define the pro-rata
share of a development’s impact
on the transportation system.
Program j. 3.2. Encourage projects to
fully mitigate transportation impacts
with financial contributions toward the
WAVE for roadway segments served
by the WAVE.
Program j. 3.3. Encourage
development projects within walking
distance of WAVE service to mitigate
transportation impacts with financial
contributions toward the WAVE.
Policy j. 4. Monitor accident rates and
trends to identify locations for possible
transportation safety improvements.
50
Table 6. Roadway Level of Service ( LOS) Standard
Roadway
Segment
Roadway segment has a
Class I/ II bicycle route
connecting to the
Recreation Trail
Road is served by year-round
transit service that
operates during a. m. and
p. m. peak commute hours
with an average headway
that does
not exceed 20 minutes.
LOS
Standard
Auto
Corridor No No D
Bicycle
Corridor Yes No E
Transit
Corridor No Yes E
Multi-modal
Segment
Yes Yes F- 2*
* F- 2 denotes that LOS= F conditions are not to exceed two consecutive hours at anytime during
the day under typical weekday conditions.
51
Figure 5, Showing Street Classifications
52
Figure 6, Showing Visitor Routes
53
Figure 7, Showing Truck Routes
54
Housing Element
Action Program
Introduction
The Housing Element consists of goals, policies, and programs to meet Monterey’s unique and
specific position in the regional housing market. Monterey is mostly built out and is the central
city for the Monterey Peninsula, so most newer housing is higher density and on previously
developed sites. New housing is expensive because it typically requires removal of an existing
use to provide a site. Monterey has a higher percentage of apartment and cluster housing and a
higher incidence of renters than other cities in the county, so this Housing Element has strong
policies to retain and build owner housing ( policies not typically found in other Housing
Elements). The Housing Element has recognized this need and has goals, policies, and programs
to provide substantial opportunities for new housing development.
The State of California mandates that each city provide adequate sites to meet its portion of the
statewide housing need. The State assigns a “ fair share” number of housing units to the regional
government ( AMBAG) and the total is distributed among the various cities. This is an unfunded
state mandate. The primary impediment to meeting Monterey’s share of statewide housing goals
is a virtual water moratorium imposed by another State agency. The City can not anticipate
meeting these Housing Element goals without an adequate water supply. The City does not have
any water available for new residential or commercial development until an additional water
supply is found. The Housing Element goals are structured to provide housing opportunities if
and when water is removed as a constraint to housing development. Monterey has an active and
effective housing program. The City has exceeded its 1992– 2002 fair- share goals for low- and
moderate- income housing, rehabilitation, and conservation, as well as City goals for lower-income
ownership. It has not met the fair- share goal for above- market- rate housing. Monterey is
one of the few cities in the state that has met the low- and moderate- income housing goals but
not the above- moderate- income goals.
The City of Monterey has for many years supported a wide variety of housing programs,
including loans, grants, and write- down of land costs for the Monterey Housing Authority and
nonprofit agencies, to support construction of low- cost housing; inclusionary zoning to provide
low- and moderate- cost housing; and zoning for more apartments than will be built in the
General Plan time frame. It has done so to provide the opportunity for the private market to
construct low- and moderate- cost housing. In addition, the City assists social- service agencies
and nonprofit housing providers in a wide range of housing services and construction needs.
Unless otherwise specified, the programs in the Housing Element will be administered by the
Community Development Department and funded by the General Fund, Community
Development Block Grants, and Redevelopment Housing Funds.
55
Goals, Policies, and Programs
a. Home Ownership
The percentage of owner- occupied housing
in Monterey declined from 52% in 1950 to
an estimated 36% in 1990. Ownership
increased to 39% in 2000, but the
preponderance of new housing will be
cluster or apartment units, with the potential
to reduce owner occupancy to less than 25%
at maximum General Plan build- out. By
comparison, owner occupancy statewide has
remained almost constant, with 54% in 1950
and 57% in 2000. Even though most new
housing in Monterey will be multi- family
housing, it is the intent of the Housing
Element to maintain and encourage
ownership housing opportunities.
The decreasing percentage of ownership
housing results from two factors. First, the
City is essentially built out, with a limited
number of large vacant sites available for
new housing construction. Second, many of
the City’s former single- family
neighborhoods are now zoned for
commercial or apartment development, and
houses are being removed for commercial
and apartment use.
The City has adopted policies to encourage
preservation of existing single- family
housing in apartment- zoned areas in order to
preserve owner opportunities where the
zoning would generally encourage removal
of a potential owner unit.
Construction of new condominiums and
conversion of apartments to condominiums
are potential sources of new ownership
housing. Many of the sites zoned for higher-density
housing have view and other
amenities which would make the site
desirable to potential homeowners, and the
Housing Element encourages owner housing
in those circumstances. Housing Element
sections on workforce housing have
additional ownership housing policies.
Goal a. Promote construction of new
ownership housing units and conservation of
existing ownership housing units to maintain
a balance between owner and rental units in
Monterey.
Implementation Timeline: 2007
Policy a. 1. Encourage the production of
new ownership housing units.
Implementation Timeline: 2007
Program a. 1.1. Primary emphasis on
larger developable sites ( larger than
two acres) should be housing types
which provide ownership
opportunities for a wide range of
incomes. The City will develop a list
of larger developable sites and contact
property owners to determine
opportunities for housing construction.
Implementation Timeline: 2007
Program a. 1.2. Maintain existing
single- family zoning throughout the
City, providing sites for 163 ownership
units. Rezoning of single- family land to
other uses should not occur without
findings that the proposed use is more
beneficial to the City than retaining
single- family ownership opportunities.
Implementation Timeline: 2007
Program a. 1.3. Inclusionary housing
units in an ownership housing project
should generally be ownership units
unless findings can be made that rental
units are more beneficial. Ownership
inclusionary units are also encouraged
in rental projects.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
Program a. 1.4. Encourage and create
development standards for new
condominiums and ownership
townhouses in R- 3 and commercial
56
areas. Provide amenities desirable to
owners, including larger units to house
families with children. Develop height,
design, and setback standards to
encourage the most creative designs.
Area Plans are encouraged to identify
potential incentives and ways to
implement the incentives.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
Program a. 1.5. Encourage conversion
of apartments to condominiums to
provide ownership opportunities. The
City will encourage conversion by
evaluating and revising its
condominium conversion standards.
The City’s inclusionary housing
ordinance applies to all condominium
conversion projects.
Implementation Timeline: 2005
Program a. 1.6. Develop collaborative
workforce housing programs with the
major employers in Monterey and the
region to provide targeted
homeownership opportunities for
employees ( see Programs h. 1.1 and
h. 1.2).
Implementation Timeline: 2005
Policy a. 2. Encourage the conservation of
existing home ownership opportunities,
including moderate- income units.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
Program a. 2.1. Develop zoning
incentives to encourage retention of
single- family houses in R- 3 areas. An
estimated 300 single- family houses
could be conserved ( rather than
demolished or converted to apartment
units). To encourage retention of
single- family homes, the City will
evaluate and revise its development
standards. The City will also continue
to allow additional floor area ratio for
single- family homes and eliminate
additional parking requirements with
building upgrades.
Implementation Timeline: 2005
Program a. 2.2. Develop a program to
allow a second ownership on existing
R- 3 lots to increase the stock of
affordable housing, retaining the
existing house where one is present
and retaining neighborhood character.
The program may use condominium,
townhouse, or detached form of
housing units, and shall utilize design
and construction methods to maximize
privacy and minimize sound
transmission.
Implementation Timeline: 2005
Program a. 2.3. Continue the Down
Payment Assistance Program for
approximately 10 units per year.
Investigate opportunities to increase
Down Payment Assistance loans for
detached single- family houses.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
b. Rental Housing
Most new market- rate and lower- cost
housing in Monterey is rental housing.
Existing zoning provides the opportunity to
construct an estimated 2,411 new multi-family
housing units.
Most of the multi- family housing potential
is in areas that are currently developed,
either R- 3- zoned areas which were formerly
single- family neighborhoods or in
commercially zoned areas that have existing
single- family houses or commercial
buildings. Because most of these sites
require removal of an existing building
before new housing can be constructed, land
costs are high and growth of rental units has
been gradual over the past eight years.
Mixed- use developments ( apartments over
57
commercial use) or apartment projects in
commercial areas typically provide the
opportunity to build apartments in the lower
price ranges and have the potential of
serving very- low- and low- income renters.
Since 1994, the City has increased allowable
density and removed many of the
impediments to mixed- use and apartment
developments in commercial areas.
Goal b. Broaden the choice of rental
housing types available to residents of
Monterey in all price ranges and for all
family sizes, while maintaining
neighborhood compatibility and, where
possible, using second units to encourage
owner opportunities.
Implementation Timeline: 2005
Policy b. 1. Provide the opportunity to
construct new multi- family housing units
in pockets of opportunity.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program b. 1.1. Maintain multi- family
densities at 30 units per acre in the R-
3 zone. The Zoning Ordinance allows
a theoretical maximum of 2,411 new
units in R- 3 zones, but not all sites are
expected to develop to those
maximum land uses.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program b. 1.2. Revise the Zoning
Ordinance to allow densities of 30
units per acre in commercial areas,
with the potential for density bonuses
as outlined in program i. 1.2
( incentives). Mixed- use densities will
allow at least 1,220 new mixed- use
units, but not all commercial lots are
expected to develop with mixed- use
housing.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
Program b. 1.3. Assist the Housing
Authority, nonprofit agencies, and
private developers in providing low-and
very- low- income housing as
opportunities become available, using
the current housing plan as a basis for
action.
The City will continue to provide
assistance by streamlining the permit
process. A staff member is assigned
to coordinate City reviews. The City
will also coordinate with the
developer to help make the project
financially feasible such as providing
low interest loans and other incentives
where affordable housing goals are
being met.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program b. 1.4. Investigate sites for
opportunities to build or support low-and
moderate- income housing units.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
Program b. 1.5. Evaluate the existing
stock of Section 8 units and encourage
and support the Housing Authority
and private market landlords to
expand utilization of the Section 8
voucher program.
• Encourage the Housing Authority
to grant 20% rent exceptions for
the Monterey area to provide a
greater housing choice for very
low income renters.
• Encourage the Housing Authority
to market the Section 8 Voucher
programs to Monterey landlords.
• Encourage the Housing Authority
to recruit more Section 8 assisted
Monterey families into the Family
Self- Sufficiency Program.
Implementation Timeline: 2005
58
Program b. 1.6. Encourage affordable
rents with the City’s Voluntary Rental
Guidelines, but discourage citywide
rent control.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program b. 1.7. Require a minimum
5,000- square- foot lot size for new
apartment development.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
c. Opportunities for Families with
Children
The number of children under the age of 20
decreased substantially between 1990 and
2000. Apartment densities and floor area
ratios generally result in small apartments
without enough room or play areas for
families with children. The number of
single- family houses can be expected to
decrease over time. As a result of these
factors, family housing opportunities can be
expected to diminish unless specific action
is taken to provide units with adequate size
and amenities for families with children.
The main opportunities for family housing
come from conservation of existing single-family
units ( see section d), providing
housing types suitable for family housing,
and providing some larger units in multi-family
housing developments or
condominiums.
Rental housing is the primary source of
housing for lower- and moderate- income
families. New apartment development
should provide an adequate number of
bedrooms and play areas for families.
Condominium and ownership townhouse
development can provide family
opportunities if units and open space take
family needs into account.
Goal c. Provide family housing
opportunities on larger sites and for all
income levels.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Policy c. 1. Encourage units suitable for
family occupancy.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program c. 1.1. Encourage units
specifically designed for family
occupancy on larger developable sites,
except in senior citizen housing
projects.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program c. 1.2. Encourage larger units
with two or more bedrooms and open
spaces with sufficient area for
children’s play in R- 3 developments.
The City will continue to encourage
family housing by requiring at least
one- third of any housing development
over 3 units to provide two or more
bedrooms . All housing projects will
continue to be required to provide
open space giving residents an
opportunity for outside activities.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program c. 1.3. Encourage the
Housing Authority and profit and
nonprofit developers to build
affordable housing for families with
children whenever possible.
The City will discuss family housing
needs with potential developers and
the financial and processing incentives
that are available.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program c. 1.4. Encourage the Naval
Postgraduate School to provide and
add to family housing units at the
Navy La Mesa Housing Area.
Encourage the Army to retain family
housing on the Presidio of Monterey.
59
The City will meet with the Navy and
Army on a yearly basis to review
development issues at the military
installations and how to provide
housing.
The City supports the military’s
proposal to rebuild its existing
housing stock through the Residential
Communities Initiative Program.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
d. Rehabilitation and Conservation
Issues
An estimated 880 units in Monterey have
serious deterioration, 2,140 units are clearly
declining, and 4,830 units have deferred
maintenance. The number of units is not
expected to increase significantly by the end
of the Housing Element time cycle ( 2008).
There are two primary contributors to
deterioration. First is the age of housing
stock. An estimated 61% of the City’s
housing is over 40 years old. Second is the
number of long- term homeowners who have
difficulty affording maintenance and repairs.
These owners often live in the oldest housing
units in the City.
Monterey has 438 inclusionary housing
units with 34 multi- family units, which
could be converted to market- rate rents in
the next ten years.
Goal d. Encourage maintenance and
rehabilitation of the entire housing stock.
The City will continue to advertise
rehabilitation programs on the City web
page and provide brochures at the City
library and housing office. The City will
maintain a waiting list of persons interested
in rehabilitation programs. When waiting
lists are depleted, the City will advertise in
the newspaper.
Implementation Timeline: 2005
Policy d. 1. Provide rehabilitation
assistance to low- and moderate- income
households and encourage privately
funded rehabilitation wherever
deterioration is present.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program d. 1.1. Provide emergency
major repair assistance to low- and
moderate- income households.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program d. 1.2. Provide rehabilitation
assistance for approximately 8 Major
Rehabilitation loans, 10 Emergency
Loan repairs, and 15 Home Safety
repair grants per year using
Community Development Block Grant
monies or other grants and funding
sources.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program d. 1.3. Continue the “ Mr.
Fixit” program to provide emergency
repair assistance for minor repairs to
an average of 10 units per year.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program d. 1.4. Encourage private
sector rehabilitation with the
residential inspection program that
inspects residential units at time of
sale and provides information for
rehabilitation at the property owners’
discretion. Average inspections would
be 300– 350 units per year.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Policy d. 2. Conserve existing low- and
moderate- cost housing units.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program d. 2.1. Investigate the option
of purchase of inclusionary housing
units or other units to replace them.
Investigate programs, nonprofit
60
sponsors, and funding sources to
retain lower- income housing units at
risk of conversion to market- rate rents.
Implementation Timeline: 2005
Program d. 2.2. Maintain the
affordability of low and moderate
income rental units under the
Inclusionary Housing Program
through the use of deed restrictions
and continue to implement the
Purchase and Resale Program for
owner occupied inclusionary units.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program d. 2.3. Continue to monitor
at- risk units and gauge interest in
renewal through individual contacts
and surveys. Meet with property
owners to strategize what package of
incentives would retain the affordable
units.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Program d. 2.4. Create and maintain
a formal list of entities interested in
purchasing or managing affordable
housing units.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
Program d. 2.5. Prioritize funding or
acquire funding to assist nonprofits to
purchase units that may be lost from
the Inclusionary Program or acquire
replacement units.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
Program d. 2.6. Analyze the
feasibility of utilizing a City
sponsored rental rehabilitation
program to encourage at- risk units to
be retained.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
Program d. 2.7. Reduce, waive or
subsidize local fees associated with
preservation or replacement of at risk
units.
Implementation Timeline: 2004
e. Equal Housing Opportunities
Monterey’s minority group population is
generally distributed throughout the City.
The City’s housing mediation service has
not processed an equal opportunity
complaint over the past 12 months. The US
and California Constitutions guarantee
certain housing rights to all residents. These
include the freedom to choose a home
within the economic capacity of the
household unhindered by discrimination.
Goal e. Provide for fair and equal housing
opportunities for all persons, regardless of
age, sex, family size, race, creed, color, or
national origin.
Implementation Timeline: Ongoing
Policy e. 1. Assure that all persons