Jim O’Hara
Encinitas City Council Candidate – District 2
We are grateful to the candidates who responded. We received responses from Destiny Preston, Allison Blackwell, Tony Kranz, and Jim O’Hara. We did not receive responses from Bruce Ehlers and Luke Shaffer. We will post their responses if they provide them.
Issue #1
Slower speeds reduce injuries and fatalities. Encinitas has been rolling out infrastructure treatments around town, such as roundabouts and speed humps as well as lowering speed limits following the passage of AB43. Other measures for reducing speed include traffic enforcement, stop signs, and traffic calming including lane narrowing, striping, speed tables, chokers, and chicanes.
Do you think reducing speeds should be a city goal?
If yes, what do you think are the most effective ways of reducing speeds?
Which streets do you think are in the highest need of reduced speeds?
I believe the duty of government is to protect public safety, amongst other things. Safe roads and mobility infrastructure is included under that umbrella. It’s a fact that slower speeds reduce injuries and fatalities.
Encinitas should continue with its mobility and circulation goals for a safer, more effective, balanced transportation infrastructure in order to meet the needs for all people. I’m glad to see that city giving attention to both the infrastructure as a whole and some well documented trouble areas.
Having a city staff with expertise and funding to make our roads safer is key, and something that I will support.
Issue #2
The El Camino Real corridor south of Santa Fe is constructed essentially as an in-town highway. A high schooler’s recent fatality there indicates how unsafe it is for those not in motor vehicles.
Do you think changes are warranted for this corridor?
If yes, what would you propose?
It’s my understanding that the Bike Walk community has been asking for traffic calming measures on El Camino Real for some time. I agree that this makes sense and needs to be a higher priority. It’s unclear to me why this key area has not been addressed by past and current city leadership. In addition to Brody, there have been other deaths and incidents over the years that bring to light the need for traffic calming measures.
Issue #3
Mixed use developments combining residential and light commercial, such as retail, have the opportunity to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) by making destinations closer to where people live.
Are there any areas in Encinitas in which you support changing zoning in order to facilitate this type of development?
This is a very complicated topic with no single answer. Zoning is not primarily based on the concept of reducing vehicle miles but rather a number of variables including the city’s general plan.
Successfully developing mixed use areas in order to reduce VMT’s relies on more than just zoning. It relies on a well connected street matrix that is user friendly. Studies show that successful bicycle and walk friendly designs rely on a network of similarly zoned and spread out locations that rely on safe routes, plenty of stops, and multitude of destinations along that network. Additionally, one common trait that any successful project aimed at reducing VMT’s should include is convenient and frequent access to public transportation – sadly, something our city and county have struggled with for decades.
Rezoning of areas in the city with projects involving mixed use should use a wholistic outlook to avoid “segmented” zoning. Zoning should be reflective of the entire city’s population and needs, using a citywide approach that includes reducing VMT’s, but reflects a priority on public safety, quality of life for all, maintainable infrastructure needs to support the zoning, and the capacity to manage a variety of transportation options.
Issue #4
Encinitas’s city code identifies parking minimum mandates for different types of development. Parking mandates eliminate the ability of businesses to right-size their parking allotment, often leading to unnecessarily wasted land and more dispersed facilities that are less conducive to walking and biking. State law prohibits parking mandates within 1/2 mile of a major transit station (in Encinitas, this includes only our downtown transit station), allowing local businesses to determine how to best use their property while increasing the bikeability, walkability, and transit mobility of the area.
Under what conditions and at what other locations would you support the removal of parking minimum mandates?
This is an evolving hot topic within state housing laws. (In fact, we just updated some of our parking requirements for ADU’s at last Wednesday’s City Council meeting) Striking a balance appears to be the best solution in the instance of Encinitas.
I support sufficient parking for businesses for both vehicles and bicycles. Parking shortages do cause significant issues for neighboring areas, as the Via Molena case has demonstrated and as is felt by neighborhoods surrounding Fox Point. Additionally, parking is helpful for employee morale for employees who live to far to walk or ride, and do not have access to acceptable public transportation from their place of employment.
There are numerous studies that show that businesses often benefit when parking is restricted. There are multiple studies that support reducing parking in urban areas does not harm business and can potentially help business. Additionally, there are environmental benefits to eliminating parking spaces including air quality and flooding risk from stormwater runoff. Both of which are great outcomes.
The majority studies both opposed to and in favor of eliminate of parking are focused on urban cities such as Portland, New York, Melbourne, Salt Lake City (PTC Consultants, Business Insider). All of the studies indicate that in order to create an increase in business when parking is removed, the following must be present; public transportation, large scale dense urban development, close proximity to both employment and resources, and safe facilities for pedestrians and cyclists.
While I think all Encinitans are in favor of the environmental benefits, they don’t appear to be getting out of their cars any time soon – studies show that the average household has gone from 1.7 cars to 2.4 in Southern California over the last decade (per SCAG).
Based on conflicting evidence to support the benefits and the challenges related to the removal of parking mandates, it seems that it should be important to strike a balance in the discussion of removing parking spaces in locations around our city. The parity between potential increased business and environmental impact, versus the overall density of Encinitas’ neighborhoods as a whole, the increase in per household car purchases, availability of public transport, and the potential impact on the surrounding neighborhoods should be the goal of identifying any locations that would be a candidate to remove parking.
Issue #5
The restaurant street-side eateries (streeteries) add to the vibrancy and people-friendliness of downtown and have been economically beneficial to the restaurants, but have been objected to by some non-restaurant businesses due to loss of street parking. One method that cities have used to manage parking is the implementation of Parking Benefits Districts (PBDs), in which metered-parking rates are set at a price to encourage turnover and parking availability while feeding revenue back into the immediate neighborhood.
What is your opinion about such a program?
How would you manage parking better in downtown Encinitas to enhance its people-friendliness and vibrancy?
The city has invested in a parking study and this merits a thorough review and consideration of the results of that study. Part of the results of that study include the topic of potentially putting in parking meters downtown.
PBD’s have been implemented in cities like Houston, Chicago, and Bend. There have been mixed results from the use of PBD’s. The districts generally offer resident permits and non-resident metered parking across a specific geographical area of a municipality.
On the upside of a PBD is the opportunity for the city to generate revenue and they offer a solution to overcrowded parking. Generally, in this model, a portion of the revenue generated is given to the neighborhood (district) directly through projects or programs. Additionally, PBD’s have been effectively implemented alongside urban park-let dining areas in some instances.
The challenges in the implementation of a PBD are that the monies generated are often inequitably spent/shared and can can actually incentivize a district to focus more on revenue generating parking than other areas of a municipality where parking is free. Additionally, paid parking leads to the question of accessibility and favors those who can afford to pay the meters or any associated parking fines over those who cannot. Additionally, a for a PBD to be effective, there would need to be a study to inventory and determine if there are enough spots for both metered and permit parking within the PBD. With the high cost of living, and incremental increases coming up in 2025 (utilities, fuel costs, increase in sales tax, and inflation), a PBD may only pile on and add to the cost of living for many.
There many options to managing downtown’s parking situation. We can look into the creation of a PBD, explore various street geometries, assess additional under used or unused spaces on areas adjacent to the 101, and we can look at available city and county assets to identify ways to maximize land use for any needed parking.
Is creating a PBD the best way to manage Encinitas parking downtown? Maybe. Is it the only way? It doesn’t appear that has been fully explored. I would advocate to further explore all options at this time with additional input from the businesses and public in collaboration with city staff so we can maximize all available resources to get the most safe and efficient solution.
Issue #6 (Optional)
The El Camino Real Specific Plan calls for converting parking lots to community gathering spaces, pocket parks, greenbelts, and multi-use residential and commercial redevelopment.
What do you like about this plan?
What do you disagree with?
I support the El Camino Real Specific Plan and it’s plans for re-development. I believe we can provide community gathering spaces, pocket parks, greenbelts and re-development while allowing for sufficient parking for the business to thrive, shoppers to park, and the city to benefit from the tax revenue generated from Buy Local Initiatives and our local businesses.
Issue #7 (Optional)
The city has made many infrastructure improvements for bicyclists and pedestrians since incorporation, though bicycling and walking are still challenging for the 8 – 80 group of bicyclists.
For your district (or for the Mayor, the entire city), what is your top mobility infrastructure improvement that you will champion?
As a City Councilor, I will be prioritizing my attention equally across the entire city and not just my district. I will focus on Public Safety for all forms of mobility. I will prioritize the development of a responsibly budgeted and soundly designed plan that backs up the goals of the City’s Mobility plan, encourages wholistic flow pattern, and includes a longterm outlook.
Issue # 8 (Optional)
The cycle track along south Coast Hwy 101 from Cardiff to Solana Beach has increased coastal accessibility via bicycle for families and slower riders. However, it has generated a lot of controversy in the road-cycling community and was the site of a recent bicyclist fatality.
Do you believe this facility needs improvement, and if so, how?
With more bicycle injuries than any other stretch of the Coast Highway, this is a controversial area amongst cyclists and residents in Encinitas. The overwhelmingly positive side of the cycle track are without a doubt, the increase in families and casual riders along that stretch. It would benefit from K.I.S.S. engineering that emphasizes simple, and consistent design with clearer (and maybe less) signage.
Issue #9 (Optional)
Encinitas will vote on whether to add a 1% sales tax to help fund the infrastructure improvement projects identified by the Infrastructure Task Force, many of which will enhance mobility around town.
If the tax doesn’t pass, how will you fund these projects?
We have an increasing annual revenue in Encinitas, and a large buffer that we simply spent on non-priority projects in the city. City Council can work collaboratively together to during the strategic planning session (and prior) and prioritize projects accordingly.
Mobility infrastructure is a top consideration in a community as active at Encinitas. We can do a lot with the revenue we have, and by eliminating unnecessary line expenditures like consultants, studies, and reports that go no where, get shelved, or programs that have come to completion and are no longer needed.