AN ADVISORY SERVICES PANEL REPORT Tustin Californiauli.org/wp-content/uploads/ULI-Documents/2006TustinReport.pdf · A re-spected ULI member who has previous panel ... On the final

A N A D V I S O R Y S E R V I C E S P A N E L R E P O R T

TustinCalifornia

Urban LandInstitute$

TustinCaliforniaEvaluation of Infill Development Opportunities

June 11–16, 2006An Advisory Services Panel Report

ULI–the Urban Land Institute1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.Suite 500 WestWashington, D.C. 20007-5201

An Advisory Services Panel Report2

ULI–the Urban Land Institute is a non-profit research and education organiza-tion that promotes responsible leadership in the use of land in order to enhance the

total environment.

The Institute maintains a membership represent-ing a broad spectrum of interests and sponsors awide variety of educational programs and forumsto encourage an open exchange of ideas and shar-ing of experience. ULI initiates research that an-ticipates emerging land use trends and issues andproposes creative solutions based on that re-search; provides advisory services; and publishesa wide variety of materials to disseminate infor-mation on land use and development.

Established in 1936, the Institute today has morethan 34,000 members and associates from 90 coun-tries, representing the entire spectrum of the landuse and development disciplines. Professionals rep-

resented include developers, builders, propertyowners, investors, architects, public officials,planners, real estate brokers, appraisers, attor-neys, engineers, financiers, academics, students,and librarians. ULI relies heavily on the expe-rience of its members. It is through member in-volvement and information resources that ULIhas been able to set standards of excellence indevelopment practice. The Institute has long beenrecognized as one of America’s most respectedand widely quoted sources of objective informa-tion on urban planning, growth, and development.

This Advisory Services panel report is intended to further the objectives of the Institute and tomake authoritative information generally avail-able to those seeking knowledge in the field ofurban land use.

Richard M. RosanPresident

About ULI–the Urban Land Institute

©2006 by ULI–the Urban Land Institute1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W. Suite 500 WestWashington, D.C. 20007-5201

All rights reserved. Reproduction or use of the whole or anypart of the contents without written permission of the copy-right holder is prohibited.

Cover photo by Nicholas Gabel

Tustin, California, June 11–16, 2006 3

The goal of ULI’s Advisory Services Programis to bring the finest expertise in the realestate field to bear on complex land use plan-ning and development projects, programs,

and policies. Since 1947, this program has assem-bled well over 400 ULI-member teams to helpsponsors find creative, practical solutions forissues such as downtown redevelopment, landmanagement strategies, evaluation of develop-ment potential, growth management, communityrevitalization, brownfields redevelopment, mili-tary base reuse, provision of low-cost and afford-able housing, and asset management strategies,among other matters. A wide variety of public,private, and nonprofit organizations have con-tracted for ULI’s Advisory Services.

Each panel team is composed of highly qualifiedprofessionals who volunteer their time to ULI.They are chosen for their knowledge of the paneltopic and screened to ensure their objectivity.ULI’s interdisciplinary panel teams provide aholistic look at development problems. A re-spected ULI member who has previous panelexperience chairs each panel.

The agenda for a five-day panel assignment is in-tensive. It includes an in-depth briefing day com-posed of a tour of the site and meetings with spon-sor representatives; a day of hour-long interviewsof typically 50 to 75 key community representa-tives; and two days of formulating recommenda-tions. Many long nights of discussion precede thepanel’s conclusions. On the final day on site, thepanel makes an oral presentation of its findingsand conclusions to the sponsor. A written report isprepared and published.

Because the sponsoring entities are responsiblefor significant preparation before the panel’s visit,including sending extensive briefing materials toeach member and arranging for the panel to meetwith key local community members and stake-holders in the project under consideration, partici-

pants in ULI’s five-day panel assignments areable to make accurate assessments of a sponsor’sissues and to provide recommendations in a com-pressed amount of time.

A major strength of the program is ULI’s uniqueability to draw on the knowledge and expertise ofits members, including land developers and own-ers, public officials, academicians, representativesof financial institutions, and others. In fulfillmentof the mission of the Urban Land Institute, thisAdvisory Services panel report is intended toprovide objective advice that will promote the re-sponsible use of land to enhance the environment.

ULI Program StaffRachelle L. LevittExecutive Vice President, Policy and Practice

Mary Beth CorriganVice President, Advisory Services and Policy Programs

Tom EitlerDirector, Advisory Services

Nicholas GabelSenior Associate, Advisory Services

Carmen McCormickPanel Coordinator, Advisory Services

Yvonne StantonAdministrative Assistant

Nancy H. StewartDirector, Book Program

Lise Lingo/Publications Professionals, LLCManuscript Editor

Betsy VanBuskirkArt Director

Martha LoomisDesktop Publishing Specialist/Graphics

Kim RuschGraphics

Craig ChapmanDirector, Publishing Operations

About ULI Advisory Services


On behalf of the Urban Land Institute, thepanel would like to thank the city of Tustinfor inviting us to assist them in the plan-ning and redevelopment efforts of the Cen-

ter City, West Village, and Southern Gatewayneighborhoods. Special thanks are extended toMayor Doug Davert, Mayor Pro Tem Tracy Wor-ley Hagen, and Council members Jerry Amante,Lou Bone, and Tony Kawashima for their visionand leadership in involving ULI in the planningprocess. Their dedication, wisdom, and leader-ship are examples of what makes Tustin a vibrantcommunity.

Special thanks go to Christine Shingleton, assis-tant city manager; Elizabeth Binsack, communitydevelopment director; Tim Serlet, public worksdirector; Patrick Sanchez, parks and recreationdirector; and Scott Jordan, chief of police, as well

as other support staff in various city departmentswho were involved in the preparation for this panel.The countless hours that they spent preparing for,informing, and assisting the panel were truly ap-preciated. Their hard work and dedication is anasset to the city of Tustin.

In all, the panel had the opportunity to interviewmore than 50 community stakeholders, all ofwhom provided valuable and insightful informa-tion. The interviewees included government offi-cials, residents, business leaders, developers,property owners, and community activists. Theirshared perspectives were essential to the panelprocess. This group of stakeholders is a majorasset in advancing and maintaining the interestsof this community.

Acknowledgments


ULI Panel and Project Staff 6

Foreword: The Panel’s Assignment 7

Market Potential 9

Planning and Design 19

Development and Implementation Strategies 26

Conclusion 38

About the Panel 40

Contents


Panel ChairRichard J. DishnicaPresidentThe Dishnica Company LLCPoint Richmond, California

Panel MembersRay BrownPresidentRay Brown ConsultingMemphis, Tennessee

Paul D. CharlesExecutive DirectorNeighborhood Recovery Community Development Corporation

Houston, Texas

Victor KarenDirector of Advisory ServicesRF Walsh Company, Inc.Boston, Massachusetts

Alan S. LevineDeputy Exective DirectorSeattle Housing AuthoritySeattle, Washington

R. Terry SchnadelbachProfessor and ChairmanUniversity of Florida Department of Landscape Architecture

Gainesville, Florida

Richard ShieldsPartnerMesa DevelopmentChicago, Illinois

Christine ViñaSpecial Projects CoordinatorCity of San Antonio Planning DepartmentSan Antonio, Texas

ULI Project DirectorNicholas GabelSenior Associate, Advisory Services

ULI On-Site CoordinatorClair WooleyEditorial Assistant

ULI Panel and Project Staff


At the invitation of the city of Tustin, a ULIAdvisory Services panel was convened toevaluate infill development opportunitiesfor the expansion of residential housing

and for commercial revitalization activities.

BackgroundThroughout its history, Tustin has been definedby its role within the context of Orange Countyand the region. Initially a farming community,Tustin built its economy and identity on agricul-ture after the turn of the last century. Home tothousands of acres of apricot, orange, and walnutgroves, Tustin was a regional agricultural centerproviding fruits and vegetables to the state ofCalifornia and beyond.

With the advent of WorldWar II, Tustin began itsfirst major transforma-tion, from a small agri-cultural community to arapidly growing subur-ban city. During the war,three military baseswere located within or inclose proximity to thecity. These military in-stallations were the im-petus for hundreds of businesses and thousands ofpeople moving to the city to work in the war andpostwar industries. The robust growth began toreplace the fruit groves as Tustin began tochange into a suburban community.

The Marine Corps Air Station Tustin and therapidly suburbanizing Orange County were themajor economic and growth engines for the citythroughout the 1980s. With virtually all the fruitgroves now gone, Tustin is almost completely builtout and experiencing growth-related problemssuch as traffic and congestion, overcrowded schools,and loss of open space.

Foreword: The Panel’s Assignment

In the early 1990s, Marine Corps Air StationTustin was placed on the Base Realignment andClosure Act list. With great foresight, the commu-nity realized the value of the 1,600 acres of virtu-ally undeveloped land within the city and withinincreasingly built-out central Orange County. Thecommunity immediately began to plan for the base’sreuse and the subsequent community transforma-tion. In 1999, the air station closed and the citybegan the long and challenging process of usingthe former base (renamed the Tustin Legacy proj-ect) to create much-needed community assets suchas housing, open space, commercial space, and en-tertainment opportunities.

After the closure of the base, Tustin experiencedthe short-term impacts of military personnel and

the affiliated workforceleaving the city. This leftvacant rental housingin Tustin’s older apart-ment neighborhoods. Arapidly growing Latinopopulation in search ofhousing quickly occupiedhousing units made avail-able from this transition.Unfortunately, whatwere once stable apart-ment neighborhoods

have become overpopulated and have also falleninto disrepair because of the lack of reinvestmentin the aging housing stock.

Today, Tustin is in the midst of a transformationfrom a sleepy suburban community to an increas-ingly urban city. The changing demographics inthe older apartment neighborhoods and the op-portunities in the Tustin Legacy project will for-ever change the city’s identity. Tustin is facedwith the challenge of incorporating new growthat Tustin Legacy while welcoming a new popula-tion into the community and strengthening theolder neighborhoods.

Tustin’s past is rooted inits agricultural history.


The Study AreasThe most significant population and housing changeshave occurred in the past 15 years with the influxof Latino households and a concentration of work-force households in the single-family, manufac-tured housing, and rental properties in the westand southwest sections of the city. This populationgrowth and concentration of low-income familieshas primarily been focused on the older apartmentneighborhoods. The panel has been instructed toaddress redevelopment strategies and conditionsthat would provide market-driven solutions to im-proving three neighborhoods: Center City, South-ern Gateway, and West Village.

Center CityThe Center City study area is located betweenSixth Street and San Juan Avenue on the north,Browning Avenue on the east, and El CaminoReal and I-5 on the south and west. This 210-acrearea has a mix of low-density single-family homes,strip retail, garden office, public institutional, andlight-industrial uses. Most of the development inthis area was built out during the 1960s and 1970s.

Southern GatewayThe Southern Gateway study area is located eastof SR-55, south of I-5, west of Red Hill Avenue,

and north of the current southern terminus ofNewport Avenue. This area primarily containsmultifamily residential housing units that wereconstructed in the 1960s and 1970s. A commercialstrip is located along Newport Avenue, as is thenew Arbor Walk condominium project.

West Village The West Village study area is located east ofthe Tustin–Santa Ana border and west of SR-55between McFadden Avenue on the south andMain Street on the north. This area contains amixture of large- and small-scale multifamily resi-dential housing units and three manufactured homecommunities. The development in this area is of1960s and 1970s vintage. There are very few com-mercial uses in this area and very few vacantparcels of land.

The AssignmentWith the Tustin Legacy project finally underway,the city began to refocus its planning efforts onits older central and southwestern neighborhoods.Members of the city council and city staff beganconversations about possible solutions to combatthe overcrowding, lack of open space, and deterio-rating conditions in the study areas. The panelwas asked to provide input on regulatory policyenhancements that will empower and energize theprivate sector to find market-driven solutions tothe housing crisis in the study areas. These en-hancements include incorporating new thinkingabout mixed land uses and increased densities,and streamlining the planning and developmentprocess to make Tustin more competitive in themarketplace.

The panel has studied the issues and framed itsrecommendations with the understanding that thecity desires to avoid the use of eminent domain; tominimize commercial and residential dislocations;and to use creative techniques, including but notlimited to overlay districts, to initiate alternativedensities and uses. The panel was also asked toprovide solutions to traffic and crime problemswhere evident in the study areas.

Location map.

M E X I C O

A

N E V A D A U

O R E G O N I D A H O

C A L I F O R N I A

Irvine

Bakersfield

Long Beach

Fresno

San Diego

Los Angeles

San Jose

San Francisco

Sacramento

Tustin


The ULI ProcessBefore arriving in Tustin, the panel received abriefing book that included history and back-ground information on the city; demographic andmarket information for the county, the city, andthe three study areas; descriptions of upcomingand proposed projects in the city; and an overviewof the planning and development review process.When the panel members arrived in Tustin, theywere briefed by representatives from the citymanager’s office, community development depart-ment, redevelopment agency, public works de-partment, parks and recreation department, andpolice department.

Panelists toured the three study areas to see theexisting conditions and development potential.They then met with community leaders and stake-holders who explained the work that they aredoing in the community, described their successesand challenges, and shared their hopes for a betterTustin. After spending the next two days examin-ing the issues, discussing and debating solutions,

and framing recommendations, the panel resentedits findings and recommendations to the TustinCity Council and the general public. This reportsummarizes the panel’s key recommendationsand observations.

Regional map.

1

55

1

5

5

405

M

ORANGE

R

Costa MesaIrvine

Huntington Beach

CoronaT nce

S

od

P

Santa AnaLong Beach

Anaheim

R

Los Angeles

S

Tustin

P a c i f i cO c e a n

10

realizing the market potential of these areas affecta larger area and greater economic issues in Tustin.The panel evaluated these areas and concludedthat it was more appropriate to combine the city’sproposed study areas into one study area that bet-ter defines the area of influence and opportunityfor the panel’s analysis and recommendations. Thenew study area is generally located south of FirstStreet, east of the Tustin–Santa Ana border andSR-55, north of Edinger Avenue, and west of RedHill and Browning Avenues.

Key Community Issues: High Demandfor Housing and RetailTustin is rising on the tide of strong economic andpopulation growth in Orange County and the suc-cessful redevelopment of Tustin Legacy, the for-mer Marine Corps Air Station. Its central locationin the county, strong adjacency and transportationaccess to major employment centers, and historicand varied neighborhoods all are attracting inter-est. To address the potential impacts and opportu-nities created by this strong market demand, thecity asked the panel to consider and recommendhow these market forces and opportunities can bebetter used to improve the quality of life and char-acter of the city.

The opportunities for and market potential ofnew development have a strong foundation in theeconomic and geographic advantages of Tustin.Several new developments have been completed,are under consideration, or have elicited signifi-cant interest:

• The 63-unit Arbor Walk residential townhousedevelopment completed on Newport Avenuesouth of Walnut Avenue;

• A 93-unit residential townhouse developmentalong El Camino under construction west ofRedhill Avenue;

Tustin began its transformation from an agri-cultural community with the opening of theMarine Corps Air Station during World WarII. Centrally located in the heart of Orange

County, Tustin is a great community to live andwork in. It enjoys excellent access to interstatesand regional highways, which position the cityclose to more than 75,000 jobs within a ten-minutedrive. Interstate 5 bisects the community east-west, connecting the city to Los Angeles and SanDiego. State route 55 connects it to the communi-ties of Santa Ana, Irvine, Costa Mesa, and thecoastal community of Newport Beach, and tomountain communities to the east.

The population of Tustin has grown with the oper-ation of the base, from 32,000 in the early 1970s tomore than 70,800 in 2006. This population growthoccurred in specific phases in response to annexa-tions and, more recently, the redevelopment of theTustin Legacy project.

The Combined ULI Study AreaThis population growth and the concentration oflow-income families in the western neighborhoodscreate both opportunities for and challenges to de-velopment interest in large areas. They also cre-ate opportunities to provide affordable housing inthe city and a chance to transition renters intohomeownership. The challenges are the qualityof the housing stock, the housing policy, code en-forcement and property management, and severeovercrowding.

The panel was instructed to address redevelop-ment strategies and conditions that would pro-vide market-driven solutions for improving threeneighborhoods: Center City, Southern Gateway,and West Village. Although the market and socialenvironments of these neighborhoods are affectedby the changing demographics and housing short-ages in the city, the consequences and impacts of

Market Potential

An Advisory Services Panel Report


• Assembly of small rental residential complexes,individually owned, into larger managed rentalcomplexes;

• New retail at Newport Avenue and I-5; and

• A 259-unit senior luxury apartment complexproposed on Red Hill Avenue north of El Camino.

These projects demonstrate the market capacityand consumer interest in new development; how-ever, these small and disconnected efforts aremerely reactions to the market, not a response toa broader community vision in Tustin. The estab-lishment of neighborhood plans that define thecommunity’s vision would serve as the basis forcreating zoning overlay districts to address design

standards, densities, and incentives for the rede-velopment of properties—which would in turn in-crease market interest and improve the quality of the community.

With today’s strong housing demand and growthand the range of housing diversity and housingprices in Tustin, there is great interest in Tustinas a place to invest and develop. The currentmarket conditions will support several kinds ofdevelopment.

Wide Range of Housing Types and Income LevelsThe need for workforce housing, for both rentaland for-sale units, is great. Absorption rates forhousing sold at market rates run six to seven units

South

LyonS

treetS

outhLyon

Street

RitcheyS

treetRitchey

Street

William

sS

treet

Carfa

x Drive

TustinVillage

Way

Del A

mo Aven

ue

PasadenaAvenue

South

Myrtle

Avenue

PacificS

treet

CaliforniaAvenue

Bryan Avenue

EbelRoad

PacificS

treet

South

CS

treet

West 3rd Street

West Main Street

West 6th Street East 6th Street

East Main StreetEast Main Street

Amado

El Camino Real

Balboa Lane

Montego Way

McFadden Avenue

East Edinger Avenue

Edinger Avenue

Nisson Road

Corla Avenue

Altadena Drive

T

Orlando Street

Tustin Grove Drive

Mear Lane

Newpo

rtAve

nue

Newpo

rtAv

enue

Schoo

l Lan

e

Service Road

Sycamore Avenue

Sycamore Avenue

Char

loma Driv

e

Carfa

x Drive

Walnut Avenue

Walnut Avenue

Windemere LanePenrith Lane

Mitchell Avenue

Mitchell Avenue

Brown

ingAven

ue

Brown

ingAven

ue

Ralei

ghPla

ceDeb

usk La

ne

Woodla

wnAven

ueUt

t Drive

Orang

e Street

Walnut Street

Red Hill

Avenue

Tustin East Drive

San Juan Street

San Juan Street

Sierra Vista Drive

Andrews Street

Jan Marie PlaceTustin HospitalMedical Center

FrontierPark

CentennialPark

Pine TreePark

Tustin MarineCorps Air Station

55

55

5

5

ElCamino

Real

Nisson Road

West Village

Center City

Southern Gateway

Study Area Boundary

Combined Study Area

Railroad

Key

1 2

3

123

Alliance Avenue

The study area.


per month per unit type and affordable housing sellsout at any initial offering.

Market-Rate HousingMarket prices for sales of single- and multifamilyhousing are currently $375 to $490 per squarefoot, and unit construction costs are $145 to $180per square foot.

Neighborhood RetailSmall-unit (less than 9,000 square feet) retail spacesrent for $2.50 to $3.50 per square foot, and shellconstruction costs $120 to $140 per square foot.

Investment PropertiesCapital markets allow capitalization rates as lowas 3 percent to 5 percent for both retail and rentalhousing.

In these market conditions, the development po-tential could support acquisition costs of $2.5 mil-lion to $3.5 million per acre. With an increase inthe density allowed on sites and with relief fromparking ratio and affordable housing requirements,it could be possible for land prices to approach $4million per acre. In several small and large rentalhousing and manufactured home sites, incomesand investment environments are such that cur-rent cash flows and capital markets would pricedevelopments in excess of $4 million per acre.

The challenge to redeveloping sites with such highvalues is to provide density bonuses on the numberof units permitted and other development conces-sions, such as relief from required parking ratiosor relief from city impact fees.

Market OpportunitiesTustin sits at the center of Orange County, whoseeconomic and demographic growth provides astrong market environment for attracting devel-oper interest in acquiring property and develop-ing commercial and residential projects in the city.Employment growth and low unemployment con-tinue to create demand for housing; more than75,000 jobs are located within a ten-minute driveof Tustin. The city’s central location offers an im-portant housing area for a wide range of workers.Congested commutes on the regional highwaysand rising gasoline prices make Tustin’s centrallocation even more valuable.

Affordable Housing Tustin has a diverse housing stock in terms of loca-tion, quality, and range in both type and price point.There are neighborhoods such as Old Town withits historic housing stock and larger single-familylots, older apartments and small-lot single-familyhomes in the study area, a variety of relatively newhousing types in Tustin Ranch, and new housingbeing developed as part of the Tustin Legacy proj-ect. Within the study area are older single-familyhomes that have sale prices lower than those ofnew homes elsewhere in Tustin, as well as avail-able apartments and manufactured homes. Thehousing scarcity in the county has placed pres-sure on these housing units in terms of marketpricing and value; however, most are still some-what more affordable than units in other areasof Tustin, surrounding communities, and OrangeCounty.

Most of the housing stock in the study area wasdeveloped over the past 50 years and is reachingthe end of its useful life. It was originally devel-oped to meet the demands of postwar growth andto provide market-based housing for military per-sonnel at the Marine Corps Air Station Tustin. Withthe downsizing and closure of the military facili-ties, this housing became available for a large in-

The Arbor Walk develop-ment on Newport Avenuesets a precedent forhigher-density infill devel-opment in Tustin.

13

flux of immigrants and for workforce housing needs.Leaving aside the qualitative and social issues inthe study area, the existence of this large, fluidrental housing stock in central Orange Countyprovides Tustin with a broader market base ofhousing than many of its neighbors.

If properly managed, this housing stock providesTustin with greater market depth as it relates tonew development and retail and rental housing in-vestment. In fact, the high demand for housinghas created high rents and housing prices, attract-ing higher-grade investment and owners into therental housing and manufactured housing commu-nities. This could attract new investment to as-semble and redevelop small-unit apartment build-ings into larger assemblies of rental housing.

Figure 2Tustin and Orange County Market Strength, 2005

Tustin Orange County

Population 70,871 2,964,800

Median Family Income $60,092 $78,300

Per Capita Income $25,932 $40,380

Median Home Price $610,000 $617,000

Workforce 41,600 1,585,500

Unemployment 3.4% 3.8%

Source: College of Business and Economics, California State University, Fullerton, 2006. Midyear Economic Forecast “Spring Update.”

ConstructionLeisure and HospitalityProfessional and Business High Tech

125

115

July2004

January2005

January2006

January2004

120

110

105

100

95July2005

Key

Figure 1Orange County Payroll Employment Change*

* Selected Sectors, Index January 2004 = 100Source: College of Business and Economics, California State University, Fullerton, 2006. Midyear Economic Forecast “Spring Update.”

Tustin, California, June 11–16, 2006


The market potential for new housing in the studyarea includes the following:

• Transformation of older manufactured homecommunities into new manufactured units orconfigurations;

• Redevelopment of manufactured housing sites;

• Assembly of smaller fourplex residential rentalproperties to create opportunities for phasedrehabilitation and improved management; and

• Acquisition of larger apartment communitiesfor rehabilitation or replacement.

Access to I-5 and SR-55 The study area is bisected by or directly adjacentto I-5 and SR-55. Northbound and southbound in-terchanges at Red Hill Avenue and a northboundinterchange at Newport Avenue give the areahigh levels of visibility and access. Along I-5, de-velopment parcels are small and generally under-developed and do not take advantage of the highvolume of traffic passing the sites or the easyaccess to the sites. Along SR-55, a major inter-change provides access to Newport Avenue fromthe McFadden Avenue ramps at Sycamore Av-enue and direct highway visibility along SR-55.Such sites along the regional and interstate high-ways have seen major development throughoutthe county and surrounding communities and pro-vide good locations for higher-density retail andemployment uses.

Tustin Hospital and Medical CenterLocated on Newport Avenue just north of the SR-55 ramps for Sycamore Avenue and McFaddenAvenue is the Tustin Hospital and Medical Center.Growth in demand for medical services along SR-55 and Newport Avenue could provide several op-portunities for development:

• Medical office building(s), which would improvethe area’s access to medical services and createstronger ties to the Tustin Hospital;

• A community pharmacy or drugstore;

• A stronger relationship between the Head Startprogram and Tustin Family and Youth Centerand the Tustin Hospital; and

• The Heritage Place senior housing facility eastof Newport Avenue on Sycamore.

Large Parcel and Assembly OpportunitiesThe study area and the surrounding neighbor-hoods contain a number of large parcels that pre-sent opportunities for larger-footprint redevelop-ment or easier acquisition and assembly. Alongthe north side of I-5 in the Center City neighbor-hood, a number of obsolete commercial develop-ments could be assembled for more intense devel-opment. The Southern Gateway and Central Cityneighborhoods also have large areas that couldbe redeveloped:

• A number of larger, single-owner apartmentparcels, which present an opportunity to im-prove access to neighborhoods, enhance theircharacter, and strengthen the connections be-tween them, as well as to increase densities;

• A number of small, underdeveloped, and obso-lete retail centers, which if assembled, couldmake possible higher-density, mixed-use devel-opments that not only improve commercial ser-vices, but also create stronger identities andconnections to the neighborhoods; and

• Tustin High School, which is being relocatedto Tustin Legacy.

Tustin Legacy The Tustin Legacy project has brought local andnational attention to Tustin and offers both directand indirect opportunities to assist with attractingdevelopment to the study area. One of the mostsignificant urban infill developments in the nation,Tustin Legacy is delivering major new open space,parks, community facilities, and private develop-ment, including nearly 8 million square feet of office,commercial, and retail space and 4,400 homes. Theimplementation of the comprehensive developmentplan and its early successes have developers, lend-ers, investors, tenants, and homebuyers looking atTustin for other opportunities.

Challenges to Market EnvironmentThe study area is intensely developed, with veryfew vacant parcels—and even fewer parcels ownedand controlled by the city. Successfully developing


new housing, commercial, or public projects in thearea requires a committed buyer and seller toovercome challenges related to site conditions,mapping, market desires, and city processes. Themarketplace has the capacity to acquire and de-velop within the city. The questions it and the cityhave are these:

• Where can affordable housing be replaced orremoved?

• Where can higher densities be located?

• How will the city work with developers to facili-tate land assembly and changes in the require-ments for density, parking, open space, and af-fordable housing?

Lack of Neighborhood Plans to GuideRedevelopment Nowhere in the study area are plans adequate todefine future land use; community requirements;street, park, or school improvements; or businessand housing policy requirements. The past incre-mental annexation by the city of unincorporatedcounty portions in the study area, the currentpatchwork of zoning parcels, and years of small-and large-lot development and redevelopmenthave resulted in inconsistent land uses, parcelsizes, access, and circulation.

The largest contribution that the city can make tocreate market demand is to work with citizens anddevelopers to define neighborhood plans and tocreate entitlements, through techniques such asoverlay zoning, for those plans. These plans needto address not only private development sites butalso public needs and requirements such as openspace, streetscapes, parking, and design standardsfor residential and commercial areas. At the sametime the community and the marketplace need towork with the city to clarify policy with regard toaffordable housing, acceptable housing (quality),and transition policies when affordable housing isaffected by development plans.

Fractured Land Ownership and LotConfigurationsAnother challenge to the development potentialof the study area is the large number of individualparcels with different types of ownership (both

residential and commercial). The area has a widerange:

• Patchwork land use and parcels;

• Development sites that are isolated from theneighborhoods, limiting development potential,timing, and economics;

• “Super blocks” without significant open spaceor circulation routes for the public;

• Oddly shaped parcels; and

• Incompatible uses adjacent to one another.

The city needs to overcome the financial expecta-tion of current property owners and to improvethe quality of development in the study area bycreating incentives for owners and potential de-velopers to sell or to assemble parcels for largerdevelopment areas. This can be accomplished bydeveloping neighborhood plans that create over-lay zoning, defining new land entitlements andhigher-density bonuses for assembling parcels.

The densities, building heights, parking, and openspace requirements could be adjusted when lotsizes meet a certain level (either larger or smaller).Overlay zoning in neighborhood plans should bedefined comprehensively for areas or zones, notparcel by parcel. Comprehensive zoning definitionprovides flexibility in design, encourages land as-sembly, and integrates open space and design va-riety within the overlay zone. Overlay zoningcould also be used to establish new minimum ormaximum lot sizes, which could be tied to densitybonuses. In addition to the fractured land parcels,a number of very large “super block” parcels im-pose other challenges. Any redevelopment ofthese parcels must include new public roadwaysand open space. The city should consider limiteduse of its acquisition powers for public streets andpublic open space on such super blocks.

Community Context and QualityA large portion of the properties in the study areainclude buildings and complexes that are reachingthe end of their useful lives. Many are not main-tained and are managed inconsistently. Develop-ers who are interested in areas adjacent to suchproperties must have assurances that codes are

16

enforced and public safety needs are met. Manyof these concerns about the community could beaddressed by establishing performance standardsfor housing maintenance and repair and propertymanagement. The development of such standardsalso allows for proactive enforcement againstderelict properties.

Poor Connectivity The study area has many barriers to vehicular andpedestrian circulation. I-5 and SR-55 bisect majorneighborhoods, stop traffic flow, and interrupt vi-sual connections. Many streets are dead ends, andparcels have been developed internally instead ofin relation to important streets and the neighbor-hood as a whole. Connections between neighbor-hoods and community amenities such as schoolsand parks are inadequate or nonexistent. The fewcommunity amenities are a limited number of verysmall parks and school playgrounds that are notprogrammed for use as joint community space.

The city has no major funds to address the currentdead-end condition of Newport Avenue, but trans-forming neighborhoods to make better connec-tions and creating new parks are both critical toattracting greater market interest and values.

Very High Land Values In the study area, the high occupancy rates andthe high rents of apartment complexes have sig-nificantly increased the values of such properties.This is true for the manufactured home communi-ties, individual fourplexes, and the larger com-plexes that have on-site managers. The actualvalue of these properties is far above the per-ceived value, despite the quality of the housingstock and the geographic issues associated withcrime and the lack of community services andparks, because they have very high cash flows.

Large apartment complexes. Individual and institu-tional investors are producing very high cash

Median Price* Year-over-YearPercent Change

$800 K

$400 K

$600 K

$200 K

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

January2001

January2002

January2003

January2004

January2005

January2006

January2000

Figure 3Median Price of Existing Orange County Homes

*Median price as of January 2006: $699,000.Source: College of Business and Economics, California State University, Fullerton, 2006. Midyear Economic Forecast “Spring Update.”

An Advisory Services Panel Report


flows. With strong demand in the capital marketsfor performing income properties, they are ableto achieve very low capitalization rates for anysales or refinancing. (The capitalization rate ex-presses the rate of return that can be expectedfrom a property based on its cash flow, expenses,and price.)

Because of the volume of capital in the marketplaceand the solid cash flow performance of Tustin’saffordable apartments, capitalization rates are atall-time lows, in the range of 3 percent to 5 per-cent. This results in very high leverage values forthe properties. When these high valuations arecombined with demolition costs, potential reloca-tion expenses, and the cost of replacement afford-able housing units, the acquisition cost of suchproperties exceeds the fair value for land else-where in Tustin, Santa Ana, and Irvine. In addi-tion, the replacement of the housing stock withnew stock for sale or rental would trigger inclu-sionary housing requirements, further increasingthe cost of development beyond what the marketwould accept.

Small apartment units. A large number of small-unit apartments in the study area also have highvaluations, as a result of both high rents and de-mand and the practice of multiple families orrenters living in a single apartment. In somecases, individual rooms are rented for as much as$1,000 per month. This creates a valuation for theproperty based on its income that is far above itsappraised value as real estate. If a fourplex apart-ment has incomes of $2,000 per apartment or$8,000 per month for the four units, it is generat-ing $96,000 in annual income. It might have a com-parable value of $325,000 per unit, but on an in-come basis it could be worth significantly more.These kinds of units can be attractive to larger orinstitutional investors, who could assemble thesmall units into larger complexes and, throughbetter management and property improvements,create strong income properties. This could be fa-cilitated through a community development corpo-ration or by providing such investors with otherincentives (density or other development rightson other parcels) to assemble the properties andimprove them.

Manufactured housing areas. The study area con-tains several manufactured housing communities.These communities are well maintained and gen-erally fully leased, with few vacancies. With morethan 30,000 manufactured homes in OrangeCounty, these neighborhoods offer an affordablehousing choice that, for some residents, have beenenjoyed for more than 30 years. Manufacturedhousing park operators own the land and lease apad to an occupant, who owns the home on theleased pad. Pads can lease for approximately $600to $1,000 per month, and the manufactured homecan usually sell for $90,000 to $135,000.

Owning such areas generates very strong cashflow for the landowner. Add that nationally suchareas are seeing extremely low capitalizationrates, in the 3 percent range. The result: as in theapartment communities, very high valuations forthe property. California sets very specific controlson the use and closure of manufactured home com-munities, to protect lessees. However, the ownersof these properties often use the current cash flowand hold the property until land values are greatenough to justify its sale. Any decision to close orinterest to acquire such properties would have tomeet the state requirements to provide a mini-mum of 12 months notice to lessees and to paymitigation expenses for relocating lessees.

Stolen shopping carts area major problem for localgrocery stores and a haz-ard for parked cars andchildren in the study area.

Community Housing PolicyMany of the potential redevelopment sites cur-rently provide affordable housing to individualsand families. Any redevelopment efforts would af-fect the supply of affordable housing. The need toassemble parcels and displace residents couldlimit market interest in certain development areasunless the city establishes clear housing and relo-cation policies. The panel recommends that thecity establish a community housing policy to ad-dress affordable housing alternatives and reloca-tion and displacement practices and programs.One potential vehicle for establishing and imple-menting community housing policy is a communitydevelopment corporation, to assist residents anddevelopers with acquisition, relocation, and hous-ing replacement.


High Construction Costs The cost of construction has seen double-digit in-creases over the past two years and today is out-pacing increases in sales prices for residentialhousing. When layered on top of requirements toprovide inclusionary housing in redevelopmentprojects, this burden of high construction costssignificantly increases the gap between cost andaffordable selling price, a gap that cannot beclosed without city assistance.

Increasing construction costs are changing afford-ability across the nation, making it difficult formid- and high-rise construction to meet marketprice requirements for condominiums. Given cur-rent market pricing of sale properties in the studyarea, larger residential buildings do not look finan-cially feasible today and could not be used to meetaffordable housing requirements without large as-sistance to residents to cover the gap.

Regulatory EnvironmentThe regulatory environment in Tustin is anotherchallenge to the market potential of the studyarea. The complex planning, zoning, and permit-ting process in both the state of California and thecity of Tustin make it difficult to assemble landand introduce new land uses in the area. The panelprovides specific regulatory recommendations inthe section on development strategies and imple-mentation strategies.

Many of the manufac-tured homes in the WestVillage are old and inneed of replacement.


Planning and Design

The planning and design recommendations inthis report are geared to facilitating market-driven private sector redevelopment, withthe public sector providing a guiding role

and priming the pump. This allows the privatesector to fully capitalize on the opportunities pre-sented by Tustin’s strong position in the market-place and advance community goals and objectiveseffectively and efficiently.

The city of Tustin initially requested that thepanel consider issues and opportunities in threedistinct study areas—West Village, SouthernGateway, and Center City. The panel expandedthese three areas into a somewhat larger overallstudy area in order to include several adjoiningareas that share common issues and opportunities,and to align study area boundaries with majorstreets. This resulted in the inclusion of severalsingle-family neighborhoods.

Within the overall study area, the panel’s planningand design recommendations are organized inthree categories:

• General design principles and design guidelinesfor maintaining and enhancing the overall char-acter of the study area;

• Ways to help stabilize and revitalize existingresidential neighborhoods in the study area; and

• Suggestions for developing an overall vision forthe mixed-use and commercial portions of thestudy area that can help guide market-drivendevelopment beyond the piecemeal site-by-sitedevelopment that is occurring now.

General Design Principles and Design GuidelinesThe concept plan on page 20 illustrates the overallplanning and design framework that the panel hasdeveloped for the study area. It defines distinct

subareas within the study area that present differ-ent challenges and opportunities from the stand-point of facilitating private sector market-drivenredevelopment. There are four subareas:

• Center City, which contains predominantly com-mercial land uses, to the northeast of I-5 be-tween Old Town and San Juan Street on thenorth and Browning Avenue on the east;

• Southern Gateway, which contains built-outresidential areas, bounded by SR-55 on thewest, I-5 on the north, Red Hill Avenue on theeast, and the current terminus of Newport Ave-nue north of Edinger Avenue on the south;

• Newport Avenue corridor, which runs throughboth Center City and Southern Gateway; and

• West Village, which is composed almost entirelyof built-out residential areas.

The panel believes that the most appropriate gen-eral design principle for built-out residential areasin the Southern Gateway and West Village ispreservation and improvement. The panel recom-mends that preservation and improvement be ac-complished by encouraging incremental changesthat involve both 1) targeted public sector acquisi-tion of certain parcels, to achieve overall publicbenefit objectives within these neighborhoods,and 2) private sector redevelopment activitiesthat focus on maintenance, improvement, and anincrease in the affordable housing stock.

Portions of the Southern Gateway to the north-west and the southeast of Newport Avenue, cur-rently developed with single-family housing, arein very good condition and do not appear to re-quire any specific improvement. The panel there-fore does not recommend any incremental changesto the single-family housing in these areas. WithinCenter City and the Newport Avenue corridor,however, the panel believes that a general designprinciple emphasizing greater density and height

beyond what is currently allowed—to five stories—is more appropriate.

Examples of design guidelines have been devel-oped to illustrate the concept plan. Although theseillustrations may appear specific, they are not in-tended to reflect definitive recommendations forspecific sites so much as to suggest generally ap-plicable ways to approach issues and opportunitieswithin a regulatory framework that facilitatesmarket-driven development.

In order to truly guide market-driven redevelop-ment and effectively respond to the varied charac-teristics of the subareas, these design guidelinesneed to be further elaborated. Recommendationsfor achieving this elaboration are summarizedbelow and detailed in the section describing thedefinition of a community vision for Tustin.

Urban Design as Public PolicyBy applying proven urban design principles, citiessuch as Tustin can create a consistent, predictableset of public policies to guide development deci-sions, facilitate the development and approval

process, and promote the public good. The panelrecommends that the city engage a qualified urbandesign specialist to create guidelines on urban de-sign to be adopted by the City Council and madean integral part of the city’s general plan, as hasbeen done in San Diego and San Clemente, amongmany other cities. Guidelines should address thefollowing:

• A pedestrian-friendly environment that encour-ages the sense of independence and freedom ofmobility for those who do not drive, such as se-nior citizens and youth;

• Properly configured streets that provide con-nectivity to adjacent areas for both automobilesand pedestrians;

• Parking located behind buildings, to allow thebuildings to be brought forward to help definethe public realm and create continuity in thestreetscape and the pedestrian experience, byreducing the number of curb cuts and movingturning traffic to street intersections;

• New land uses clustered along major city thor-oughfare corridors at natural nodes, such as in-tersections between the thoroughfare andmajor interstate highways, with infill develop-ment along the thoroughfare that helps definethe public realm and forms a continuous pedes-trian experience uninterrupted by frequentcurb cuts;

• Civic squares and parks that are large enoughfor public gatherings, festivals, group recre-ation, and community celebration, to strengthencivic bonds and increase citizens’ knowledge ofand respect for each other;

• Parks and other green open spaces, and land-scaping along corridors that helps both defineand connect spaces, districts, and the corridorsthemselves. One of Tustin’s great strengths liesin the remarkable amount of green space it con-tains. Future development, both private andpublic, should continue this precedent by includ-ing substantial, well-maintained borders andtrees. In particular, dense, well-maintainedhedges bordering surface parking lots reducethe visual impact of such lots while enhancingthe continuity of the pedestrian experience;

The panel’s concept plan.

West Village

Center City

SouthernGatewayNew

port

Avenue

Old Town

Tustin HighSchool Site

Parks

Residential

Mixed Use

MajorIntersections

Key

5

5

55

55

RedHill

Avenue

Edinger Road

20 An Advisory Services Panel Report


• Size, proportion, height, bulk, and architecturaldesign of new construction that define the streetspace and public places of shared use betweenbuildings and reinforce the edges of these spaces.New projects should respect, be compatible with,and link with existing structures. This issuetranscends style but addresses fit and propri-ety. Proper architectural design helps orientpeople in space, time, location, and culture; and

• Appropriate design of streets and buildings thatreinforces safe environments while preservingaccess and openness as well as a sense of com-munity. Street grids that extend through over-sized blocks create more walkable, manageableenvironments, facilitating access for fire trucks,ambulances, and patrol cars.

Built-Out Residential AreasThe West Village, which is primarily residential,and the residential areas on either side of New-port Avenue in the Southern Gateway are builtout and densely populated. Occupancy is at densi-ties that make potential acquisition for redevelop-ment extremely expensive.

During the interviews, the panel heard from amajority of stakeholders that Tustin’s affordablehousing stock is a very important community asset,one that should be maintained and improved. Ifmaintenance of current affordable housing stockis a priority, the economics of development (as de-scribed in the section on market potential) suggestthat market-driven private redevelopment ofbuilt-out residential areas in the West Village andSouthern Gateway is unlikely to occur in the nearor intermediate term. Yet because of the signifi-cant strength of the housing market in OrangeCounty, the potential for large-scale private sectorproperty acquisition for redevelopment of exist-ing affordable housing units with market-ratehousing cannot be totally discounted, especiallyin the longer term.

Accordingly, development strategies to implementthe planning and design framework for built-outresidential areas in the West Village and SouthernGateway focus on the following:

• Incremental improvements that can be imple-mented to immediately improve the quality oflife in these neighborhoods, with targeted publicsector acquisition of individual sites for neigh-borhood parks and plazas to open up views andprovide access into these neighborhoods; and

• Methods to facilitate enhancement of the af-fordable housing stock, including expansion ofhomeownership opportunities, in the short andintermediate term, by both not-for-profit andfor-profit private sector developers.

To help guide longer-term market-driven develop-ment for these areas (as recommended later), theoverall community vision should include a com-prehensive housing policy, laying out a financiallyfeasible plan to ensure the community’s workforceand affordable housing goals and objectives are at-tained even if large-scale private sector propertyacquisition occurs later.

Commercial Streets and AreasCenter City and the Newport Avenue corridorpresent the opportunity for more immediate mar-ket-driven redevelopment by the private sector.The area has recently seen significant investment,including the Arbor Walk, a 63-unit condominiumdevelopment on Newport Avenue in the Southern

The lack of parking is amajor issue in the studyarea.


Gateway that was built in 2005 and quickly soldout. Another 93-unit condominium development isunder construction on El Camino Real in CenterCity, and a senior housing development on RedHill Avenue in Center City is under review.

Many stakeholders mentioned that, when theseprojects were first presented for consideration,they provoked questions about the appropriate-ness of their design in advancing Tustin’s overallimage. Discussion was hampered because Tustinhad not developed and described a community vi-sion. It was therefore impossible to assess thedesign of these projects in terms of effects onthe community.

Development strategy recommendations for im-plementing the planning and design frameworkfor Center City and the Newport Avenue corridortherefore focus on the following:

• Developing and effectively applying designguidelines that establish a vision to help guideprivate sector market-driven development;

• Linking the consideration of potential densifica-tion in these portions of the study area to theprovision of public benefits in the built-out resi-dential areas by using a transfer of developmentrights (TDR) concept; and

• Facilitating appropriate private sector redevel-opment of significant opportunity sites withinthese areas, such as Tustin High School, New-port Avenue at its new connection to EdingerAvenue, and the I-5/Red Hill Avenue nodethrough design guidelines and techniques suchas overlay zoning.

Street corridors such as Red Hill and NewportAvenues are particularly valuable places to con-struct mixed-use buildings lining the street fronts.In this instance, mixed use refers to individualbuildings that contain retail or commercial useson the ground floor, with housing or office spaceabove. Such buildings are historic urban buildingtypes that form a more continuous street wall,helping define the public space of the street. Theirground-floor uses contribute to the pedestrian ex-perience and add life and vitality to the areas inwhich they are located. The panel recommendsthat the city encourage the construction of this

building type in appropriate locations along majorthoroughfares in the study area.

Development OpportunitiesStrong market conditions present Tustin with sig-nificant development opportunities in the studyarea. Although the study area is largely built outand the economics of development make any proj-ect difficult, the panel believes that the city has astrong foundation on which to build.

Old TownOne concern raised by many stakeholders regard-ing redevelopment within the study area involvesthe potential impact of such redevelopment on OldTown. With its low scale, landscaping, and store-fronts, Old Town retains many of the physical de-sign characteristics that lend such appeal and charmto a small downtown. At the same time, Old Townis almost a museum of itself, bravely attemptingto preserve the feeling of a bygone day with a mixof retail that is ill suited to bringing in the numberof consumers needed to create real economic vital-ity. It is populated with marginal businesses suchas antique shops and small specialty boutiques,many of which appear to be operated more as hob-bies than as businesses.

As a result, it is unlikely that any market-drivenredevelopment that would occur in the study areawould negatively affect the activities that cur-rently occur in Old Town by competing directlywith them. Moreover, redeveloping sites that thepanel has identified in Center City with higher-density residential uses could benefit Old Townindirectly by increasing its local base of potentialcustomers.

Nevertheless, the panel believes that Old Townrepresents such a significantly underperformingcommunity asset that a more direct approach isalso required to fully realize its potential. Accord-ingly, in addition to the existing Tustin Old TownAssociation, the panel recommends that the citysupport the establishment of an Old Town Busi-ness Improvement District (BID), with the follow-ing main functions:

• Help retain and assist existing businesses intheir attempts to succeed;


• Program events that promote Old Town as adestination;

• Work with merchants on joint promotion, mar-keting, security, parking, and maintenance;

• Recruit new businesses to locate on MainStreet; and

• Keep Old Town clean and safe.

The panel also recommends strengthening theidentity of Old Town as the symbolic heart andsoul of Tustin by extending and supplementing theexisting identity program with additional signage,banners, light fixtures, and streetscape elements.The historic residences to the west and north lendsubstantial character and architectural identity toOld Town. The panel encourages their continuedrestoration and upkeep by individual residents.Finally, to help maintain Old Town’s character asfuture development activities occur, the panel rec-ommends that the city create and adopt designguidelines specific to the character and architec-ture of Old Town, applying to new construction,remodeling, and changes in the public realm, andspecifying minimum standards for property main-tenance.

Newport Avenue CorridorNewport Avenue is a major gateway into Tustin’scenter. With its interchanges with both I-5 andSR-55, it is the major commercial thoroughfare forthe South Gateway and Central City. The panelbelieves that its commercial importance should bestrengthened.

The area in the vicinity of the SR-55 McFaddenAvenue exit onto Newport Avenue could accom-modate higher-density, commercial and office de-velopment because of its high visibility. The exist-ing fourplex buildings along the south side ofSycamore at the southeast corner of NewportAvenue could be rezoned under a special perfor-mance zoning classification for medical serviceland uses. In conjunction with the adjoining TustinHospital and Medical Center, this site could be de-veloped into a four-story medical arts buildingwith direct access and parking. Its ground floorcould house a much-needed walk-in diagnosticcare facility.

The fourplex block at the northwest corner ofNewport Avenue and Sycamore has a major civicrole to play. As a gateway site and much-neededopen space for recreation programs for the south-central neighborhoods, this site should be pur-chased as parkland. Planned as both a children’splaying field, to be used in conjunction with theTustin Family and Youth Center located at the in-tersection’s northeast corner, and an adult and se-nior citizen’s garden, the proposed parkland wouldset a strong civic focus and image. The architec-ture and landscape architecture of all threeparcels at this intersection should be designed asone composition. A 20-foot setback and landscapedevelopment should be required for all streetperimeters.

The commercial strip between Newport Avenue’stwo freeway entrances contains a wonderful as-sortment of ethnic businesses. Its internationalcharacter should be recognized and enhanced infuture development. A streetscape improvementproject for the public right-of-way could provideunified sidewalks, lighting, signage, and streettrees. A planted, curbed median should be installeddown the entire length of this commercial strip.

Several of the panel’s recommendations for OldTown also apply to Newport Avenue, including the following:

Old Town Tustin is acharming commercialdistrict that would benefitfrom the creation of abusiness improvementdistrict.


The panel’s proposedNewport Avenue concept.

Mixed-Use Housing

Fountain

Key

CommunityCenter

MedicalArts

Building

MedicalArts

Building

ParkingGarage

Parking Garage

Kids Play Area

Newpo

rtAven

ue

Walk-inClinic

Parking Garage

55

Sycamore Avenue

Proposed land use planfor the Tustin High Schoolsite.

35 Acres438 Housing Units12.5 Dwellings/Acre

Park

Single-Family Homes

Triplex Stacked Flats

Parking

4

Key


• Establishing design guidelines to ensure thecompatibility and contributions of new con-struction, remodeling, and changes in the publicrealm; and

• Setting minimum standards for property main-tenance.

It is also recommended that new height limita-tions and alternate building forms be consideredalong Newport Avenue, not only to add characterand definition to the streetscape but also to in-crease both the number of potential businessand job opportunities and the number of potentialcustomers.

Existing Tustin School Sites within the Center CityLike many residents of Tustin, the panel sees thehigh school and elementary school in the CenterCity as the most significant development opportu-nity within the inner part of the city. The panelrecognizes that, in order to generate the fundsneeded to construct the new high school at TustinLegacy, both school sites must be developed foradditional housing at densities exceeding twicethat currently allowed.

The panel believes that establishing a floor/arearatio (FAR) that will allow the city to enforce itscurrent standards for open space while limitingbuilding height to no more than five stories willachieve two important objectives:

• Generate the necessary return on the sale ofthe property; and

• Set aside a portion of the site for communityopen space, as required by the current regula-tions that govern redevelopment.

In establishing this FAR, the city can ensure thata substantial portion of the school site will servethe public benefit without infringing on the needsof the school system and without severely affect-ing the small-town character of the city. Appropri-ate architectural design will both mitigate the ap-parent height and bulk of the buildings to lendproper scale and include sufficient articulation toachieve compatibility with the architectural char-acter of downtown Tustin.

Red Hill Avenue and I-5 The Red Hill Avenue and I-5 node in Center Cityis yet another compelling development opportu-nity. Its visibility and its direct highway access,coupled with its marginal land uses, make thisnode a natural for redevelopment, facilitated byappropriate height and density bonuses as part ofa zoning overlay. As in the cases of the school sitesand the Newport Avenue and SR-55 node, thepanel recommends the consideration of an in-crease to a five-story height limit for developmentat the Red Hill Avenue and I-5 node.

The panel’s proposed RedHill Avenue concept.

RedHill A

venue

New OfficeBuilding

Condominiums/Seniors’ Housing

Hotel

High-DensityCondominiums

5 Stories

ModernizedStrip Commercial

Parking

5

5


During the interviews, when panel membersqueried citizens about what makes Tustin a great place, most defined their city interms of its central location, its position

as a “divided community-both geographically andethnically,” or its former small-town atmospherewhere one could find quiet refuge at the end of ei-ther a long day or a long life. The city proudly dis-plays its logo, but although it is reminiscent of theagriculture-based community that defined theoriginal city, it seems an unfit reference to Tustin’scurrent position in Orange County. When askedabout a location of contemporary civic space, mostrespondents were at a loss to articulate any notionof a particular place, event, or vision. Neither didthey understand what Tustin is or might ventureto be. This lack of a common vision for Tustin mustbe addressed.

Community VisionThe apparent apathy or lack of understanding ofcivic engagement is aggravated by the perceptionof “staff-heavy” interaction and interception in thepublic process. This is accompanied by the accu-rate public perception of a fiscally responsiblegovernment, which contributes to the notion thatthe city operates in the black. To establish a visionfor a city that has grown to its current conditionby responsible governing warrants some holisticthought. The many neighborhoods that composeTustin are an undefined yet integral component ofthe city and require close examination. Until thecity is clear on its sense of direction, any statedresolution to resist growth and development willimpede its market position.

As Tustin proceeds, its vision must be derivedfrom community input and resultant policy, basedon discussion regarding the following:

• Public engagement;

• City and neighborhood character;

• Neighborhood planning; and

• Regulatory examination.

Public EngagementTo establish a consistent community vision, thecity must begin a process of public engagementfor all segments of the community. This will notonly open lines of communication, in terms of dia-logue about future growth, but will also allow thecity to respond in a timely manner to developmentopportunities, with the assurance that it has thesupport of its constituents.

To implement a meaningful public process, thepanel recommends that the city create a neigh-borhood association and community organizationdatabase, with contact information, by surveyingthe following:

• Mandatory homeowners associations;

• Voluntary neighborhood associations; and

• Community or neighborhood-based organiza-tions.

Geographic areas that lack representative bodiesshould also be identified. By maintaining a data-base of community representation, the city willbe able to make contact efficiently and equitablywith citizens with regard to community planningand rezoning efforts, infrastructure development,civic discussion on public policy, and communica-tion for public interest, community health, andcivic events.

Given the changing demographics of Tustin, it isimperative that cross-cultural discussions begin.The city must recognize that, in its quest to pro-vide an opportunity for public involvement, out-reach must take place in many forms and themeans of communication will often be culturallybased. The panel recommends that informationprovided to specific segments of the community

Development and ImplementationStrategies


be delivered at a minimum in both English andSpanish. The appropriate venues (churches, healthand community centers, grocery stores and com-merce locations) for communication should be de-termined, to make sure the city’s message is dis-seminated effectively.

As public involvement from varied sectors of thecommunity begins to transform from a “necessityof last resort” to a “preferred first line of defense,”the opportunity for meaningful public discussionon the myriad of issues facing the city will becomea transforming element in the perception of andtrust in the municipal government. An examina-tion of two critical issues germane to the panel’sassignment could be used to begin the civic en-gagement discussion process:

Redevelopment of the high school site. The pro-posed relocation of Tustin High School could pro-vide a place for much-needed and desired commu-nity services and open space. The transformationof the school site will require a significant amountof public discussion and visioning to determine thebest use for the property. Critical to the trans-formation is a clear and open civic engagementprocess; failing that, the project will face strongpublic opposition.

Workforce housing policy. The commitment to ac-commodate workforce housing, generally acceptedby most residents, should be established as a pol-icy. This policy can outline and define the pre-ferred manner and means by which affordablehousing demands can be incorporated into thecity structure without compromising quality of lifefor any citizen. Any policy of this nature must en-gage all sectors of the municipal and stakeholdercommunity.

City and Neighborhood CharacterTustin is a city of diverse neighborhoods. Mostoften cited as a positive by residents, neighbor-hoods are the essence of community life. Neigh-borhoods comprise a number of critical elements;their interdependence and interrelationships cancontribute to their greatness. A neighborhood ismore than a collection of buildings and housingparcels. People make up the fabric of a communityand a diversity of peoples makes a communityrich. Tustin’s west and south sides contain such

richness in their diversity of ethnicity, age, andhousehold composition.

Parks. A city contributes to the sustainability ofcommunity life by providing recreation and socialservices. Parks and open space provide much-needed wholesome activities and contribute to aneighborhood’s quality of life. Tustin has a greatparks system that serves the city well. However,the parks in the study area are, in many cases,substandard and could easily be considered to becontributing to the diminished quality of life forboth the youth and the adult populations.

Parks and schools are the community facilitiesthrough which social and recreation services areprovided by the city. They are provided in responseto specific population characteristics and includeteen facilities, daycare, Head Start, health services,counseling, and meeting rooms for the elderly.

Pedestrian-friendly streets. Sustainable communi-ties have safe and pedestrian-friendly streets. Asystem of interconnected streets with sidewalks isa basic component for encouraging pedestrian ac-tivity. Neighborhood plans should define the de-sired character of their streets. Special attentionshould be given to night lighting, so that peoplefeel safe when walking. Overly long and dead-endstreets should be eliminated, because city blocksin a grid pattern are safer than culs-de-sac.

Pedestrian safety in theWest Village is a concernwhen school lets out atthe Robert Heideman Ele-mentary School.


Schools. Ideally, a neighborhood should have an el-ementary school in a central location that is withinwalking distance for the population that it serves.Children should be provided with a safe and cleanroute of daily travel. Streets to and from schoolsshould have wide sidewalks and bike lanes. Streetcrossings should be protected and manned.

Parks and neighborhood schools, along with safeand clean pedestrian routes, should be structurescommon to all Tustin neighborhoods. New blocksof owner-occupied housing around these facilitiesshould be encouraged, because they provide com-munity stability and vested citizenry. Together,good schools, well-designed parks, and a perime-ter of diverse, owner-occupied homes form aneighborhood’s sense of place and identity. Eachneighborhood possesses a distinct flavor, reflect-ing its social composition.

It is essential to provide neighborhood parks andtheir much-needed social and recreation servicesin the West Village neighborhood. The panel rec-ommends that these be located near HeidermannSchool to form a neighborhood center.

The Currie Middle School and Jeane Thorman El-ementary School sites are important to the South-ern Gateway neighborhood. They should become afocal point for the neighborhood; the open spaceshould become a joint park and school-operated

facility. The Beswick School and adjacent FrontierPark, which also serves as a focal point for theSouthern Gateway neighborhood, should continueto serve as such.

The neighborhood in the expanded study areanorth of McFadden Avenue and west of NewportAvenue lacks both open space and community ser-vices. The panel recommends that the city acquireland to develop a new one-acre park that is centralto the neighborhood. An unsuccessful shoppingcenter in the neighborhood’s northeast corner hasvacant retail space in the rear that would make anexcellent community center if pedestrian accesscould be provided for the whole neighborhood.Discussions with the owner could be mutuallybeneficial: for the city, a long-term, low-cost leaseand for the owner, increased traffic and potentialcustomers.

Commercial services. Sustainable communities con-tain diverse commercial and retail services thatdeliver necessary goods and services to the sur-rounding population. The quality of these servicesin the study area varies greatly. The SouthernGateway and City Center neighborhoods have arange of retail options along Newport Avenue andare sufficiently served. The West Village is defi-cient in both commercial and retail services. A su-permarket is needed, and the panel recommendsthat the city begin negotiations with a major chainfor the development of an urban market on the va-cant parcel of land on the corner of Williams andMcFadden Avenue. This should be a full-servicestore, with a deli, prepared foods, internationalfoods, a pharmacy, a bank, and delivery service.

Neighborhood PlanningAn important result of the neighborhood planningprocess will be greater articulation of a commu-nity vision, based on the collective vision of indi-vidual neighborhood plans. The panel recommendsthat the city make a commitment of time and re-sources to the development of neighborhood plansfor the study area neighborhoods. These plansmust be developed with meaningful communityinput and must address, at a minimum, the issuesof density, open space, community facilities, trans-portation connections, and public safety. Neigh-borhoods need to be given an overall framework

The vacant parcel of land on the corner ofMcFadden Avenue andTustin Village Way is anexcellent location forneighborhood-servingretail.


within which they can be expected to produceplans that address these issues.

Neighborhood plans are essential to establishingthe predictability that developers will demand be-fore they will become active partners in the trans-formation of the study area. Such plans will alsoinform the investment decisions of individuals andinstitutions. Many of them base such decisions onthe anticipated return on investment. A compre-hensive set of neighborhood plans will contributeto the perception that Tustin is a city with a de-fined vision for the future and thus, less invest-ment risk. City leaders in the municipal, develop-

ment, and chamber communities can actively mar-ket the city with a coherent message that capturesthe desired vision of a future Tustin. Developmentopportunities will benefit from a less arbitrary ap-proach to site development and design review, andthis approach will ultimately eliminate the currentpiecemeal development.

Regulatory Examination: Land Use Designationsand Zoning DistrictsIn its discussions, the panel evaluated the currentland use designations. It is readily apparent that adisconnect exists between the city’s commitmentto provide additional housing opportunities and

Proper maintenance,management, and codeenforcement are toolsused to deter crime in thenumerous alleys in thestudy area.

both the land use designations and the zoningcode. To address current development opportu-nities that would integrate mixed uses, it will benecessary to revise land use designations andzoning districts.

The revision of land use designations is essentialto allow for higher residential densities andmixed-use development. The panel recommendsthat the city create a land use designation that in-corporates a mix of residential and commercialuses. The designation must address an increase inbuilding height limits to accommodate appropriatedensities at defined nodes. The new land use des-ignations should include zoning overlay districts intargeted neighborhoods that address residentialand commercial character. Such districts wouldneed to be approved through a commission.

In addition, consideration should be given to re-viewing the existing code to allow a form-basedor performance-based code within defined dis-tricts. Such codes would better facilitate bothappropriate development and efficient review and permitting.

By providing opportunities for market-driven de-velopment to occur in the context of establishedpolicies on land use, zoning, and neighborhoodcharacter, the city can actively promote and en-able development opportunities both at existing

nodes and in other neighborhoods—opportunitiesthat will not only capture desired market sharebut will do so in the context of Tustin’s communitydevelopment goals.

Improve Government EffectivenessThe city of Tustin would like the developmentcommunity to see the city as a “can do” place. Toshow that the city is open for business, it must ex-amine its processes and interactions with both theprivate sector and public institutions such as theschool district and neighboring communities. Thecity has demonstrated that it can effectively workwith the private sector in the Tustin Legacy proj-ect. However, the redevelopment of neighbor-hoods poses challenges not present in the entitle-ment and development of Tustin Legacy. Thedesired revitalization of the study area neighbor-hoods will require pursuit of a legal process tochange land uses and densities.

Entitlement ProcessIt is essential that the city make a serious effort toimprove its entitlement processes. During the in-terviews, the panel confirmed the assumption inthe ULI assignment brief that planning and pro-cessing actions needed to be streamlined. Manydevelopers indicated that they would never do aproject in Tustin, given any alternative. Specificproblems cited included the following:

• The unpredictability of what the city wouldapprove;

• Conflicting advice from different city staffmembers regarding what the city wants to see happen;

• Uncertain timetables for approval;

• Costly and tardily delivered requirements fromcity staff for development improvements;

• Excessive parking and open space requirements;

• Increased cost and risk to developers from theprocess of combining conceptual and detailedland use approvals and subdivision mapping;and


It is not uncommon forthe garage units in thestudy area to be used forillegal business or pur-poses other than theirintended use.


• An antidevelopment attitude on the part of keycity staff members.

Although these are the views that developers oftenexpress toward regulators, the panel believes thatthe consistency of expression and the specificity ofcomplaints makes these views more than the nor-mal grumbling one would expect from the devel-opment community.

Much of the authority for the entitlement processis vested in the community development director.The panel recommends a number of changes in theway business is done, changes that it believes willresult in a process that is predictable, transparent,objective, reliable, and flexible.

Predictability. Developers need to be able to un-derstand what the entitlement process is, howlong it will take, and what steps are required.

Transparency. All interested parties need to beable to understand decisions as they are made,and the rationale for decisions needs to be clear.

Objectivity. Entitlements need to be made accord-ing to clear criteria that are based on a foundationof solid neighborhood planning and design criteriathat have been subject to public review andscrutiny before adoption.

Reliability. Developers need to know that once adecision has been made it will not be overturnedor reviewed outside established processes. TheCity Council needs to focus on the adoption ofplans and policies, not the review and approval ofland use and building entitlements. Those tasksshould be delegated to the Planning Commission.

Flexibility. Developers are seeking flexibilityrather than the rigid prescription of land usecodes, to produce projects that will work betterfor them and for the communities they serve.

Changes to the entitlement process that producethese results would be a welcome change for thedevelopment community and should make the jobsof city staff easier as well.

Process ChangesTustin’s entitlement process for land use approvalsshould be revised. Currently the community de-velopment department has broad discretion, but it

does not appear to have all the tools necessary tocreate better development in the city.

The panel recommends an approval processgrounded in neighborhood planning that will givedevelopers and neighbors the ability to maximizethe benefits of a development to the community.This should be thought of as a way to create a win-win situation.

The new approval process should have the follow-ing objectives:

• Offer an alternative to prescriptive codes;

• Encourage better design;

• Allow a project to be responsive to a site’scontext;

• Enable flexibility in the application of develop-ment standards; and

• Engage citizens and developers early in theprocess.

The panel recommends that the city offer develop-ers the option of securing land use entitlementswithout producing more than a concept plan for aproject. As an example, developers should nothave to submit detailed building plans with rezon-ing requests. Furthermore, developers who wishto follow the zoning ordinance without a varianceor departure from the established standardsshould be entitled to building permits based solelyon their submission of plans and supporting docu-mentation that are consistent with the applicablecodes. It is likely that few, if any, developers willavail themselves of this option, given the opportu-nity to improve their project through the newprocess. The entitlement process should enabledevelopers to negotiate departures from the landuse codes in exchange for improvements to theirprojects.

Use of Planning CommissionThe panel recommends the use of an independentboard such as a planning commission to conductthe entitlement process. The commission shouldreview projects brought to the city and guidethem through the predevelopment process. Thecommission should consist of an architect or otherdesign professional, a developer, and a neighbor-


• Modify the number of required off-street park-ing spaces within a prescribed range or for afixed set of criteria; and

• Reduce required open space in exchange for acontribution to an open space fund.

Planning commission decisions should be bindingon the community development director. Appealsshould be limited to review of the process andquestions related to the authority of the commis-sion to authorize certain departures, not the de-sign judgment decisions of the commission.

The commission needs to be professionally staffedby the community development department, andadequate training for both the commission and de-partment staff is essential.

After the planning commission has approved azoning decision, the developer would submit de-tailed drawings and, after review, a building per-mit would be issued.

Intergovernment RelationsTustin must improve its relationships with a num-ber of jurisdictions. They are discussed in order ofimportance.

Tustin Unified School District. The city and theschool district need to work together to resolvekey problems. The first task is to establish openand honest channels of communication betweenthe two entities. One way to make this happen isto hold joint regular meetings between school dis-trict board members, the City Council, and keyleaders of both entities. A focus on a common vi-sion for cooperation between the two entities isessential.

Other agenda items should include discussion ofcommon problems:

• Youth issues;

• Property crime;

• Before- and after-school activities;

• Joint use and programming of school buildingsand playing fields;

• The location of any new or rehabilitated elemen-tary and middle schools;

hood resident. Business leaders and communityorganization representatives are also potentialmembers. Staff support should be provided by thecommunity development department. Two of theprimary objectives of this approach are to involvethe community early in a project’s design, givingthe developer the opportunity to respond to com-munity concerns before spending large sums ofmoney, and to create the transparency that thedevelopment community believes is missing in thecurrent process.

All planning commission meetings should be opento the public. A typical sequence of events wouldstart with an initial meeting at which a developerpresents a concept plan and the commission givesearly design guidance on a variety of issues. Thisguidance would be informed by neighborhood plans,the plans of adjacent and nearby property owners,and input from the community. Topics to be re-viewed early in the process include the following:

• Site plans, including vehicular access and off-street parking locations;

• Bulk and scale, including setbacks, modulation,and lot coverage;

• Architectural elements and materials;

• Pedestrian environment; and

• Landscaping and the streetscape.

The commission would be able to waive or modifyany of these requirements in exchange for im-provements to the building’s overall design andappearance.

Consideration could also be given to allowing thecommission to

• Increase building height within a prescribed en-velope (i.e., building height could be increasedup to a certain percentage within various zones)with or without an increase in the number ofunits;

• Increase the number of units in a project for af-fordable housing purposes (again within a cer-tain range);


• Open space to accommodate the growth inschool enrollment; and

• Entitlements needed for the existing TustinHigh and Lambert Elementary Schools site.

It will take a commitment of time and effort tomake this new approach work, but such communi-cation is necessary to address these and otherpressing issues.

Santa Ana. A number of issues relating to theWest Village cannot be resolved without the coop-eration of the city of Santa Ana. Only a coopera-tive effort of community policing between the twopolice departments for the West Village neighbor-hood can address issues such as gang activitiesand the pursuit of offenders. Many of the resi-dents in this area live in a state of fear.

Other government agencies. The city of Tustin rec-ognizes that it is located in an environment wherechange is rapidly occurring, both within and out-side its boundaries. In urbanizing areas such asOrange County, it is impossible to avoid the im-pacts of these changes. The panel recommendsthat the city undertake a “best practices” reviewof the surrounding communities in order to pre-pare itself for the changing world in which it is lo-cated. Just as the orange groves are not returningto Orange County, the social and political prob-lems affecting Tustin are not going away either.

Intra-Tustin ProcessesOne of the problems identified in the interviews isthat key city staff members and elected officialshave not necessarily bought into the same visionand plans for the study area neighborhoods. Al-though this is understandable, given the lack ofplanning for these neighborhoods, it is a core ele-ment of the lack of predictability and clarity per-ceived by many participants and observers. It isvery clear what the city does not want to do (i.e.,use eminent domain to transfer property from oneparty to another, become a public developer), butit is less clear what the city does want to do.

For any enterprise to be successful, all leadersmust be on the same page. For Tustin to display a“can do” attitude, this is an essential step. Giventhe part-time nature of the City Council, it is im-portant that adequate time be set aside to permit

the city’s elected and appointed leaders to syn-chronize their thinking.

Create a Community DevelopmentCorporation: A Better Tustin CDCIn many cities, the city government develops thehousing policy and the private sector implementsthat policy. Based on the panel’s review, it recom-mends the establishment of a community develop-ment corporation (CDC), charged with responsi-bility for implementing the city’s goals forproviding affordable housing and neighborhoodrevitalization. The city should continue to be re-sponsible for making and enforcing public policyregarding neighborhoods and affordable housing,while the private sector would be responsible forimplementation.

A community development corporation is a501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that facilitates theprovision and maintenance of affordable housing,both for rent and for sale, within a service area.The corporation would acquire and rehabilitatemultifamily properties within the target area. Forthe purposes of this report, the panel has namedthe organization A Better Tustin CDC.

OrganizationA board of directors consisting of Tustin resi-dents and area stakeholders should govern theCDC. The board should seek to include an ethni-cally diverse group of development, finance, andpolicy professionals, in addition to local residents.It is important that the board represent all ele-ments of the community.

MissionOne of the main roles of the CDC will be to pro-vide homebuyer counseling and training, to facili-tate new homeownership. The CDC’s activitieswould enhance the quality of life for all residents.Programs could involve safety and security, beau-tification and maintenance, area marketing, eco-nomic development, job training, educationalprogramming and augmentation, community in-volvement and outreach, and building communitypride. The building of community pride (and en-hanced quality of life) would parallel improve-ments in the built environment.


At the outset, the CDC should partner with expe-rienced development entities that have the capac-ity and financial vigor to accomplish the desiredoutcomes within a reasonable timeframe. Thispartnership should expand the capacity of theCDC to ensure the sustainability of both itself andthe developments that result from its activities.

StaffingInitially, the CDC should be staffed with an execu-tive director, a project manager, and an assistant.The executive director should be responsible fororganization, administration, and relationshipbuilding, while the project manager should ensurethat production and planning goals are establishedand met in a timely fashion. Additional staffingwill be required as the programmatic businesslines are established and as they mature. Thecity should provide office space for the CDC incurrently vacant or surplus city offices.

FundingThe panel recommends that the city of Tustin in-vest redevelopment funds and other city resources,as available and subject to any statutory limita-tions (because only part of the study area is withinredevelopment project areas), in funding initialstartup, administration, planning, and acquisitioncapital costs for A Better Tustin CDC. Any in-

vested funds should then be leveraged with philan-thropic, public, and private capital.

Affordable Housing OpportunitiesThe diversity of the population in the city is recog-nized as one of Tustin’s strongest assets. To main-tain this asset, it is important that the stock of af-fordable housing be maintained. The city may alsochoose to increase the stock of affordable housingavailable for homeownership for low- and moder-ate-income families and provide a supply of afford-able housing options for growing families.

State law requires that 15 percent of dwellingunits in a redevelopment project area be allocatedfor low- and moderate-income residents. The cityalso has responsibilities under the Regional Hous-ing Need Allocation process, promulgated by theSouthern California Association of Governments,to meet affordable housing goals citywide.

The city of Tustin has encouraged affordable hous-ing development through a program that providessoft second mortgages or other subsidies for buy-ers and developers. Research has shown thatthese programs have resulted in a minimal num-ber of new housing units. The panel recommendsthat the city make affordable housing a majortenet in its comprehensive and master plans. Thecity should commit to providing incentives for afull range of affordable housing units. These hous-ing units should consist of single-family stand-alone units as well as units within multiunit struc-tures (duplexes, quads, etc.).

Local conversations revealed that the CommunityReinvestment Act is significantly underused inthis area. The city should leverage public moniesand its relationships with financial institutions, in-stitutional investors, developers, and governmentto amass the necessary funds, while its public pol-icy decisions serve as incentives. A Better TustinCDC would also leverage funds to reach its goalsof affordable housing production.

The Tustin Legacy project has opened up loca-tions that could be used to address other impor-tant community facilities and generated the taxincrement to fund such community needs. TustinLegacy also provides new affordable housingstock, including units for both rental and sale.

New housing develop-ment in Tustin Legacy is amajor component of theMarine Corps Air Station,Tustin redevelopment.


This new affordable housing needs clients for bothtypes of units. The city should consider these newunits as places where current renters in the studyarea could transfer to new rentals or to homeown-ership. This “Tustin first” relocation approachcould assist redevelopment efforts in the studyarea by requiring no new subsidy and by freeingup rental units in the study area for redevelop-ment or rehabilitation.

Improved Property Management ofRental PropertiesWhile touring the study area, the panel saw thatmany multiunit dwellings need significant im-provement. Crime statistics show that a sizablenumber of police calls come from these units.These same units are overcrowded.

The panel recommends that the city establish anincentive program that encourages owners ofthese properties to maintain them in bettercondition. Incentives should include financial op-portunities such as grants and rehabilitationloans and adjustable basis financing, but the cityshould also strengthen its code enforcementwhere violations are persistent. The TEAMprogram, wherein the police department andproperty owners work toward mutually benefi-cial solutions, should be expanded.

Parks, Open Spaces, and Plazas The city of Tustin currently requires 30 percent ofa new development area to be open space. Existingdeveloped areas have limited open public spaces.

The panel recommends that the city acquire (orcause to be acquired) sites in strategically selectedareas for open spaces and parks or plazas for pub-lic activity. The city should identify targeted areasthat lack open spaces and use parks and recreationor community development funds to acquire prop-erties to convert to public uses. An alternative ac-quisition approach would be for the city to offer aproperty owner the opportunity to swap land inthe study area for an appropriate parcel in TustinLegacy. It may also be prudent for the city to useits eminent domain powers to acquire these sites.

These open spaces would provide gathering placeswithin neighborhoods. They could be used for

communal play and rest and relaxation, as wellas to build community and enhance the qualityof life for residents. They could be used for civicprogramming, public gardens, or simply opengreen spaces.

The panel further recommends that the city part-ner with community-based service groups in jointuse agreements for some public facilities, to in-crease the amount and effectiveness of program-ming offered to residents.

Enhanced Community ServicesThe city’s parks and recreation department pro-vides many opportunities for recreation, withopportunities available for providing additionalprogrammatic services for youth and seniors res-idents. One of the city’s services to children andyouth in the study area is the Tustin Family andYouth Center. The center is overcrowded andphysically landlocked, with little expansion spaceforeseeable at the current location and no out-door recreational space. It is recommended thatthe city make provisions for a larger Tustin Fam-ily and Youth Center in order to expandits capacity.

The shortage of parksand open space inthe study

A large percentage of the housing stock in thestudy area is in poorphysical condition and in need of refurbishmentor replacement.


area demands better joint programming of avail-able spaces. This improvement should includestrengthening relationships with the school dis-trict for joint use of facilities. Program improve-ments could temporarily alleviate some of the ef-fects of the overcrowded Family and Youth Center.The city should also look to other service providersto enhance the capacity to serve the needs of thestudy area. Examples might include the OrangeCounty Office on Aging, the Boys and Girls Club,the YMCA, and others. A proper mix of fee ser-vices and free services should be provided.

Also, the study area lacks comprehensive com-munity health care. Because of the long-termpublic policy implications, the city should addressthese health care needs. A potential source of re-sources might be the Federally Qualified HealthCenters, which have been used in many citiesacross the nation.

Public/Private Partnership StrategiesTo maximize the impact of neighborhood revital-ization, the production of affordable housing, and

The Tustin Family andYouth Center providesrecreational activities andsocial services to manyresidents of the studyarea.

The rear portion of theTustin Freeway ShoppingCenter on NewportAvenue is an excellentlocation for a communitycenter.


the achievement of community services objectives,the panel recommends that the city work with ABetter Tustin CDC to pull together a full range ofpotential financing mechanisms. The entities to in-volve include the private sector, the legislature,and the city. An organized consortium of fundingand financing sources will provide capital for oper-ating programs as well as projects. This approachwill ensure that public funds are leveraged withprivate sector investment and ensure the long-term viability and success of the master plan.

The panel also recommends that the city promotea physical and programmatic connection betweenTustin Legacy and the study area. These connec-tions should include vehicular and pedestrian ac-cess. Public transit connectivity should also beadded. In the proposed move of Tustin HighSchool to the Tustin Legacy site, students will beforced to create new pathways to get to and fromschool. These connections could be encouraged toaccomplish some of the city’s societal goals withinthe study area.

The panel further recommends that the city de-velop and pursue a plan to leverage Caltrans high-way improvement plans with city goals and objec-tives. The current plans to widen SR-55 and I-5will affect the neighboring communities, and thecity should ensure that these effects will be miti-gated. These mitigation measures should enhancethe master plan for the neighborhoods affected.

The city should use a public/private partnershipapproach similar to this recommendation to ad-dress externally generated community impacts,whether they are environmental, traffic and trans-portation, demographic, or public policy impacts.


advance private sector market-driven redevelop-ment of sites that offer significant opportunity.And fourth, the city should foster the applicationof a full range of public/private financing mecha-nisms to support the creation of new affordablehousing and community revitalization.

These are not easy tasks; accomplishing them willrequire strong leadership and cooperation from allinvolved parties. The city of Tustin must step upto identify all community stakeholders and bringeveryone to the table. The city’s leaders will senda strong signal to the development and invest-ment community that they are serious aboutwanting successful neighborhood revitalizationand that the city is “open for business.” Althoughthe panel’s recommendations may seem extensiveand overwhelming, the panel strongly believesthey can be implemented if the city can establish acommunity vision, set policies that encourage re-vitalization, and streamline the development ap-proval process.

The city of Tustin is at a unique moment in itshistory. It has an opportunity to capitalizeon a convergence of community needs andstrong market dynamics. A strong commu-

nity visioning process can bring these elements to-gether to create a location that will foster a senseof place for residents and establish the studyarea’s role within the city and the region.

The dynamic neighborhoods in the study areaoffer tremendous opportunities for improvedhousing and commercial space. However, if theseneighborhoods are to share in the successes of theOrange County real estate market, the city musttake a number of actions. First, it is imperativethat the neighborhoods are stabilized and readyfor redevelopment. Second, the city must formu-late plans for the study area that reflect the com-munity’s needs and desires, to guide private sec-tor development in a way that helps achieve thecommunity’s vision more effectively and effi-ciently. Third, the city should create a CDC toassist in the acquisition and assembly of land fordevelopment; encourage property managementimprovements for existing rental properties; and

Conclusion


site of the former Winterland Auditorium. In addi-tion he was involved in developing three otherapartment projects comprising 1,012 units in theSan Francisco Bay Area. He was responsible forobtaining tax-exempt bond financing at lowerfloater rates for all of these projects, a new tech-nique for financing apartments in the 1980s. Allthese projects were in infill locations. From 1989to 1993, he also served as the chief financial officerand chief operating officer of K/W Realty Group, aKlingbeil-affiliated company in housing sales. Hisrole in this company included overseeing the jointventure development of 42 subdivisions with morethan 4,000 units of housing for sale, most locatedin three major metropolitan markets.

From 1980 to 1982, Dishnica was a principal ofComstock Ventures Limited, a real estate venturecapital company. From 1978 to 1980 he was vicepresident of Fox and Carskadon Financial Corpo-ration, where he was responsible for the solicita-tion, analysis, negotiation, and management ofreal estate development joint ventures. From1973 to 1978, Dishnica was an assistant vice presi-dent with Union Bank in San Francisco, Califor-nia, with responsibility for commercial lending,real estate construction lending, and loan work-outs. Prior to his employment with Union Bank,he served as an officer in the U.S. Navy, achievingthe rank of lieutenant with assignments in Viet-nam and as the officer-in-charge of a minesweeper.Dishnica received his master’s degree in businessadministration from the University of SouthernCalifornia in 1974 and his bachelor of science de-gree from Ohio State University in 1968.

Dishnica is a member of the Urban Land Insti-tute, serves on the Multi-Family ResidentialCouncil as its program vice chair and serves onthe San Francisco District Council ExecutiveCommittee. He is also a member and was a direc-tor of the National Multi Housing Council.

Richard J. DishnicaPanel ChairPoint Richmond, California

Rick Dishnica is president of the Dishnica Com-pany, LLC. The Dishnica Company was formed in1999 to pursue Dishnica’s individual investmentgoals, to develop infill housing, both for sale andfor rent, in the Bay Area and to provide real es-tate consulting services. Current major develop-ment projects include obtaining entitlements for(1) the final phase of a residential project nextto the Lafayette BART station in downtownLafayette (the first phase of 75 apartment unitswas successfully completed and leased in 2001)and (2) the adaptive reuse and conversion of theSan Francisco Armory, a building on the NationalRegister of Historic Places located in the MissionDistrict of San Francisco.

Dishnica was an executive vice president and thechief operating officer of American ApartmentCommunities, a privately held real estate invest-ment trust, from 1994 through March 1999, withresponsibility for all apartment operations, devel-opment, and rehabilitation. Until its merger withUnited Dominion Realty Trust in December 1998,American Apartment Communities owned andmanaged directly or through subsidiaries, 54apartment communities containing 14,141 units innine states (California, Colorado, Florida, Indiana,Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Oregon, and Washing-ton). The total asset value on the date of themerger was $787 million. Another portfolio con-taining 4,000 units was retained to continue thebusiness of American Apartment Communities.

Dishnica also served as an executive vice presi-dent of the Klingbeil Company, the predecessor toAmerican Apartment Communities, with operat-ing responsibilities for the western United States.He was directly responsible for the developmentof 304 apartment units in San Francisco on the

About the Panel


Ray BrownMemphis, Tennessee

Ray Brown offers architectural and urban designservices as a consultant to Memphis architecturalfirms for individual projects. As needed, he pro-vides creativity, skills, experience, knowledge,and ideas in fields of specific expertise the firmmay need, such as architectural and urban design,project direction, and project development. Heseeks projects that have the potential to improvethe quality of life for disadvantaged residents bytransforming at-risk urban neighborhoods intomore livable communities.

Brown directed the design and construction ofAutoZone Park in Memphis-America’s finestminor league baseball park, and a crown jewel inMemphis’s downtown renaissance. As vice presi-dent for development at the Memphis Center CityCommission, Brown set the framework for thedowntown urban design plan, facilitated new de-velopment, recruited new businesses, and admin-istered design standards.

For 26 years, Raymond Brown Architects spe-cialized in providing municipal and private clientswith architectural and urban design projects, fo-cused on downtown redevelopment and planning.

Brown taught architectural design at the Univer-sity of Cincinnati and was the downtown plannerfor the city of Dayton. He is a member of theMemphis Habitat for Humanity “Green Hat” con-struction committee. Brown holds a bachelor ofscience degree in architecture from the Univer-sity of Cincinnati.

Paul D. CharlesHouston, Texas

Charles is the executive director of the Neighbor-hood Recovery Community Development Corpo-ration (NRCDC) in Houston, Texas. For the past

ten years, he has led the NRCDC in the develop-ment and redevelopment of affordable housingand commercial real estate projects.

Charles holds a bachelor of science degree in civilengineering from the Technological Institute (nowthe McCormick School of Engineering) at North-western University. He is also a graduate of theAmos Tuck School at Dartmouth College, with amaster of business administration in general man-agement. Charles is a registered, licensed engi-neer in California, where he worked as an engi-neer and a real estate consultant for a number ofyears. He has also held positions with large-scalemaster plan developers, as well as other commu-nity-based organizations.

Charles is active in a number of civic, community,and professional activities both locally and nation-ally. He is president of the Houston chapter of theNational Black MBA Association; a member ofClass XVIII of Leadership Houston; the formertreasurer of the CDC Association of GreaterHouston; president of the Texas Association ofCommunity Development Corporations; assistanttreasurer of the National Congress for Commu-nity Economic Development (cochair of the Bud-get and Finance Committee); a member of theTexas Department of Insurance Economic Devel-opment Roundtable; chair of the Third Ward Re-development Council; an Inner-City Adviser forthe Urban Land Institute; and a member of theExecutive Committee for the Urban Land Insti-tute Houston Council, the Tuck Alumni AdvisoryProgram, and BluePrint Houston. Charles is alsoinvolved in the Advanced Practitioner Programthrough the Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organi-zations of the Kennedy School of Government atHarvard University. He serves as a mentor andchaperone to the Leaders of Tomorrow (a mentor-ing program). Charles also has served as nationaltreasurer of the National Society of Black Engineers.


Charles has received numerous civic awards, in-cluding Outstanding Young Men of America (threetimes) and the Leadership Award from the Ameri-can Legion, and is listed in Who’s Who Among Ex-ecutives and Professionals.

Victor KarenBoston, Massachusetts

Karen is director of advisory services for the RFWalsh Company, a Boston-based development andconstruction management firm that providesclients engaged in complex real estate projectswith a wide breadth of services from concept de-velopment through construction. As part of RFWalsh’s predevelopment planning team, Karenfocuses on urban projects that require a balanceof public and private interests. His experience in-cludes managing entitlements for the ChannelCenter mixed-use project in the Seaport Districtadjoining downtown Boston and assisting Beth Is-rael Deaconess Medical Center, in Boston’s Long-wood Medical and Academic Area, in creating apartnership with a private developer whereby ex-cess medical center property will be developedinto a biomedical research center.

Before joining the RF Walsh Company, Karenwas director of real estate development for Mass-Development, a state development finance agency,in which capacity he oversaw state involvementin reuse planning for a 1,500-acre naval air stationthat was closed in 1995. Before that, he was deputydirector of the Boston Redevelopment Authority,the city’s planning and development agency, wherehe managed public review and approval of down-town and waterfront revitalization projects, in-cluding the 100-acre Charlestown Navy Yard.

Karen is a registered architect with bachelor’s andmaster’s degrees from the Massachusetts Instituteof Technology. He served on previous ULI Advi-sory Panels for Treasure Island in San Francisco,

California; St. Julien’s Creek Naval Annex inChesapeake, Virginia; and Lowell, Massachusetts.

Alan S. LevineSeattle, Washington

As deputy executive director, Levine managesthe Seattle Housing Authority’s development andasset management programs. Major projects haveincluded four HOPE VI redevelopment projectsincluding NewHolly, which has received ten majorawards, including the HUD-CNU Award for Chang-ing the Face of America’s Public Housing.

Working with public, nonprofit, and private part-ners, the agency currently has more than 200acres in development, including affordable andmarket-rate rental and ownership housing, retailcenters, and institutions. When completed, theAuthority’s four HOPE VI projects will representa real estate investment of well over $1 billion.The Asset Management Group oversees a real es-tate portfolio of more than 7,000 units and is ac-tively selling and acquiring properties consistentwith the agency’s strategic plans.

Levine originally worked for the Seattle HousingAuthority from 1971 to 1980 and organized theNeighborhood Housing Rehabilitation and theScattered Site Housing Programs. He worked ina variety of private sector positions, including hisown development and consulting business from1980 to 1998. In 1998, he returned to the SeattleHousing Authority as asset manager, responsiblefor organizing and implementing an asset man-agement program that resulted in new budgetingprotocols, staff and agency reorganization, andthe introduction of private sector property man-agement methods. In 1999, Levine was nameddirector of development and, in 2000, deputy exec-utive director.


Levine received his bachelor’s degree from HunterCollege of the City University of New York andhis master’s degree in urban planning from theUniversity of Washington.

R. Terry SchnadelbachGainesville, Florida

Schnadelbach, professor of landscape architectureat the College of Planning, Construction, and De-sign, at the University of Florida, is former princi-pal of Schnadelbach Associates (1969–1995). Hehas had major commissions throughout the UnitedStates, Europe, Southeast Asia, and the MiddleEast. He has consulted in London, Paris, Rome,Seville, and Berlin to governments, institutions,and private industry.

Schnadelbach earned degrees in architecture atLouisiana State University and in landscape ar-chitecture at the Harvard Graduate School ofDesign. He was the 1964 and 1965 winner of theAmerican Academy in Rome’s coveted Prix deRome in landscape architecture. He has receivedawards in urban design from the U.S. Depart-ment of Housing and Urban Development, theBard Award of the City Club of New York, anddesign awards from the American Institute ofArchitects, the New York State Association ofArchitects, the American Institute of Steel, theNational Association of Home Builders/Instituteof Residential Marketing, and the Philip N. WinslowLandscape Design Award of the Parks Council ofNew York City.

Schnadelbach’s work has been exhibited at theMuseum of Modern Art, the Whitney Museum,and the Urban Center in New York City, theNelson Atkins Museum in Kansas City, and theBoston Museum of Fine Arts. He has taught land-scape architecture at the University of Pennsylva-nia, the Harvard Graduate School of Design, andthe Rhode Island School of Design. He has alsotaught environmental design at the MassachusettsInstitute of Technology, and real estate develop-ment at the School of Architecture of ColumbiaUniversity. He has lectured at colleges and uni-versities throughout the United States, includingCornell University and the University of Virginia,and in France.

Schnadelbach has designed public spaces andwaterfront parks in Trenton, Baltimore, Denver,Boston, New York, Baltimore, Washington, andPhiladelphia. He directed more than 350 contractsin executing and coordinating the 1976 AmericanBicentennial site improvements throughout thehistoric and central business districts of Philadel-phia. More than 1 million visitors attended thatJuly 4th celebration. In Baltimore he was asked tosubmit designs for a park to complete the culturaland commercial Inner Harbor development andlink that development to the newly built CamdenYards baseball stadium, home of the BaltimoreOrioles. He has been the site planner and land-scape architect of the U.S. Open Tennis Facility,the largest tennis facility in the world, which at-tracts more than 50,000 spectators a day. Locatedin Flushing, Queens, New York, the facility is con-sidered the most urban experience on the GrandSlam circuit.

In Europe, Schnadelbach has worked extensivelyin France, Germany, and Spain. He has been thelandscape architect for corporate headquartersand industrial plants, including Centre Thomson,Gennevilliers, a national competition won in 1986and completed in 1988; the new headquarters forMessier-Bugatti in Villacoublay; the Centre duTechniques, EDF/Electro Division de France, inSt. Denis; and the GE Medical Division’s produc-tion plant at Buc, Île-de-France. Schnadelbachhas been commissioned to design a new water-front for the Saône River, in Lyon. Phase I of asix-year master plan has just been completed. Hedesigned the Longwy Ferrous Museum and In-dustrial Archeology Centre, a Grand Project ofPresident François Mitterrand; the Plaine del’Est, in Lyon, winning project of an internationalcompetition; and ecological studies and highwayalignment selections for Sophie Antipolis, in theFrench Silicon Valley near Nice, and for Brest, Fin-istère, Brittany. In Spain, Schnadelbach plannedfor the cascade entrance between the city ofSeville and the Expo 92 World’s Fair. This plazawas traversed by more than 100,000 visitors daily.

Schnadelbach has been a ULI member since 1989and has served on numerous Advisory Servicespanels, many specializing in the revitalization ofinner-city neighborhoods. He was a member of the


panel on the South Central corridor in Los Ange-les after the 1994 riots. Other panels on inner-cityrevitalization include those in Fort Wayne, Atlanta,and Trenton. He teaches studio and conducts lec-tures on urban design at the University of Florida.His studio research includes urban districts inJacksonville, Miami, and Orlando, Florida.

Richard ShieldsChicago, Illinois

A principal of Mesa Development, LLC, Shieldsis a leader in large-scale land and public and pri-vate sector developments. Mesa is a Chicago-based national real estate developer and investorwho is committed to developing residential andmixed-use projects in major cities and urbanareas. Through exceptional design and site selec-tion, Mesa seeks and delivers “best of market” liv-ing choices with a focus on urban living. Sensitiveto social, contextual, and market opportunities,Mesa works with leading architects, engineers,contractors, and investors to identify, plan, ac-quire, zone, market, and construct developmentsthat have received significant market success andindustry praise.

Major developments Mesa has worked on includeThe Heritage at Millennium Park, a 57-story highrise, and the Legacy at Millennium Park, a 72-story high rise, both condominiums in the eastloop of Chicago; One Market Square, a 29-storycondominium on the former Market Square Arenasite in downtown Indianapolis; and the 1,316-unitPark Boulevard project, a 30-acre mixed-use,mixed-income development on a former ChicagoPublic Housing Authority site. Other developmentsinclude a large-scale lakefront development onformer landfill in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, involv-ing more than 1,500 residential units.

Shields also led the redevelopment of GlenviewNaval Air Station and Fort Sheridan, both in Illi-nois, and the 1,089-acre Orlando Naval TrainingCenter in Florida. Shields has served as an ad-viser to the Secretary of the Army on privatiza-tion; to the National Trust for Historic Preserva-tion regarding the preservation of Ford Island atPearl Harbor in Hawaii; and on the ULI Advisory

Services panels for Ft. Meade housing and theSt. Elizabeth hospital site development in Wash-ington, D.C.

Christine ViñaSan Antonio, Texas

Viña, a special projects coordinator for the City ofSan Antonio Planning Department–Neighborhoodand Urban Design Division, works primarily witha diverse range of citizens from inner-city neigh-borhoods, to facilitate the public input process forboth community planning efforts and design stan-dards development. In her six years with the city,she has developed a zoning overlay program to as-sist neighborhoods that want to protect neighbor-hood character, through an objective reviewprocess that uses specific sets of design standardsfor each neighborhood. She provides extensivepresentation and editorial material for the depart-ment and research and analysis on Zoning andBoard of Adjustment reviews. She also supervisesthe plan review process for the department’sneighborhood and corridor overlay districts.

Viña is currently in charge of an extensive com-munity plan for the near west side of San Antonio,most widely known as the true heart of the city’sMexican American culture. The primary commer-cial corridor through the community was the focusof one of two recent Advisory Services panels thatthe city hosted within a short three-month span.The ULI report, Avenida Guadalupe, and the revi-talization strategies outlined in the report will beused to organize the community plan and its urbandesign component. She was also the lead staff liai-son to a second ULI panel visit and report, on theSt. Paul Gateway District, for the near east side ofSan Antonio, which once was the center of theAfrican American community and culture.

Prior to her service with the city, she served forfive years as the executive director of the South-town Mainstreet program, acting as the liaison be-tween property owners and the city for a three-corridor area just south of the Central BusinessDistrict. Southtown is designated as both an offi-cial national Main Street program and a localNeighborhood Commercial Revitalization program.


Viña holds a bachelor’s degree in architecturefrom Texas Tech University. She spent ten yearsin Washington, D.C., with several architectural,engineering, and interior design firms, and wasalso the assistant director for Internship Pro-grams for the National Council of ArchitecturalRegistration Boards. Prior to returning to Texas,she held a position providing housing market re-search in the multicounty D.C. metro area.