an advisory services panel report li ttle …uli.org › wp-content › uploads › uli-documents...

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

Little SaigonWestminster, California

Urban LandInstitute$

Little SaigonWestminster, CaliforniaStrategies for Transforming Little Saigon

October 1–4, 2007An 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

The mission of the Urban Land Institute is toprovide leadership in the responsible use ofland and in creating and sustaining thrivingcommunities worldwide. ULI is committed to

• Bringing together leaders from across the fieldsof real estate and land use policy to exchangebest practices and serve community needs;

• Fostering collaboration within and beyondULI’s membership through mentoring, dia-logue, and problem solving;

• Exploring issues of urbanization, conservation,regeneration, land use, capital formation, andsustainable development;

• Advancing land use policies and design prac-tices that respect the uniqueness of both builtand natural environments;

• Sharing knowledge through education, appliedresearch, publishing, and electronic media; and

• Sustaining a diverse global network of localpractice and advisory efforts that address cur-rent and future challenges.

Established in 1936, the Institute today has morethan 40,000 members worldwide, representing theentire spectrum of the land use and developmentdisciplines. Professionals represented include de-velopers, builders, property owners, investors, ar-chitects, public officials, planners, real estate bro-kers, appraisers, attorneys, engineers, financiers,academics, students, and librarians. ULI reliesheavily on the experience of its members. It isthrough member involvement and informationresources that ULI has been able to set standardsof excellence in development practice. The Insti-tute has long been recognized as one of the world’smost respected and widely quoted sources of ob-jective information on urban planning, growth,and development.

About ULI–the Urban Land Institute

©2007 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 Jennifer Lefurgy

Westminster, California, October 1–4, 2007 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 three-day panel assignment isintensive. It includes an in-depth briefing com-posed of a tour of the site and meetings with spon-sor representatives; interviews with communityrepresentatives; and a day for formulating recom-mendations. On the final day on site, the panelmakes an oral presentation of its findings and con-clusions to the sponsor. At the request of the spon-sor, a written report is prepared 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 three-day panel assignments areable to make accurate assessments of a sponsor’s

issues 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, academics, representatives offinancial institutions, and others. In fulfillment ofthe 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 StaffMarta V. GoldsmithSenior Vice President, Community Group

Thomas W. EitlerDirector, Advisory Services

Cary SheihSenior Associate, Advisory Services

Matthew RaderSenior Associate, Advisory Services

Carmen McCormickPanel Coordinator, Advisory Services

Romana KernsAdministrative Assistant, Advisory Services

Nancy H. StewartDirector, Book Program

Kimberley ToddManuscript Editor

Betsy VanBuskirkArt Director

Martha LoomisDesktop Publishing Specialist/Graphics

Craig ChapmanDirector, Publishing Operations

About ULI Advisory Services


On behalf of the Urban Land Institute, thepanel would like to extend special thanksto Westminster City Manager Ray Silverfor bringing this three-day panel study to

Little Saigon. The panel also recognizes ChesterSimmons of the city manager’s office for coordi-nating the panel’s briefing materials, organizingthe study area tour, and scheduling interviewswith the key stakeholders.

The panel gleaned significant insights from thecity’s thorough briefing materials as well as fromthe guided tour expertly provided by Westmin-ster Police Lieutenant Bill Collins. The panelwould also like to thank Chief of Police Andrew

Hall, as well as Tami Piscotty and Rosemary Val-dovinos in the city manager’s office, for their in-sights and assistance.

While only on site for three days, the panel hadthe opportunity to collect useful informationfrom more than 30 area stakeholders. The indi-vidual perspectives of these Little Saigon busi-ness owners, residents, and public officials werecrucial to the panel process. These stakeholdersare major assets in advancing the interests oftheir community.

Acknowledgments


ULI Panel and Project Staff 6

Foreword: The Panel’s Assignment 7

A Physical Framework for Transformation 13

The Substance of Transformation 15

Roles and Responsibilities in the Transformation 20

Conclusion 23

About the Panel 25

Contents


Panel ChairJ. Kevin LawlerManaging PartnerN-K Ventures LCWest Palm Beach, Florida

Panel MembersJohn HixenbaughPresidentMuniPlanSaint Petersburg, Florida

Michael J. MaxwellManaging PartnerMaxwell + Partners LLCMiami Shores, Florida

Trang D. TuPrincipalTrang D. Tu ConsultingSeattle, Washington

ULI Project DirectorJennifer LeFurgyConsultant to ULIPasadena, California

ULI Project StaffCary SheihSenior Associate, Advisory Services

ULI Panel and Project Staff


Growing from a modest clustering of restau-rants and small shops geographically cen-tered at the intersection of Bolsa Avenueand Magnolia Street in the late 1970s, to

over a million square feet of commercial space dis-tributed over a mile and a half corridor today, thearea of the city of Westminster known as LittleSaigon has evolved as the de facto capital of therefugee and exile community of the former Re-public of South Vietnam.

Little Saigon has emerged within the city of West-minster without direct city involvement in shap-ing the physical contours or composition of thearea. To date, the city has supported the Viet-namese-American community’s desire to growthrough the exercise of its traditional municipalfunctions and services. However, for over a decadethe city and various stakeholders within the Viet-namese-American community have been activelydiscussing issues of mutual concern regarding thegrowth of Little Saigon.

As part of its long-term economic developmentstrategy, the city has raised a number of questionsregarding the outlook for continued growth anddevelopment in Little Saigon. In order to helpframe an overall strategy, the city commissionedthe ULI Advisory Services program to address aseries of specific planning and development issuesin Little Saigon.

Little Saigon is generally recognized as the oldest,largest, and most prominent concentration of Viet-namese commercial activity in the United States.There has been minimal redevelopment or revital-ization of properties within the area, althoughsome transitions from industrial to retail uses arenow occurring with warehouse and light industrialproperties. Fragmented ownership patterns,dated architectural design, traffic congestion, lackof adherence to city codes, and a lack of pedestrian

Foreword: The Panel’s Assignment

environment are all well-articulated concerns ofthe city.

Although the area is presently thriving, the cityrecognizes twin, competing challenges for LittleSaigon. On one hand, Little Saigon has notreached its full potential as a cultural epicenter forthe Vietnamese-American community; at present,it is less than the sum of its parts. On the otherhand, its very success to date could undermine its

The city of Westminsteris exploring ways toenhance and sustain thelong-term viability ofLittle Saigon.


long term viability. As the Vietnamese-Americancommunity matures, the tastes, preferences, andcultural cohesiveness of the community have beenchanging and are expected to continue to evolve.

The city presented the panel with a series of ques-tions framed by the following list of general goalsand objectives for the study area.

• Improve and revitalize the commercial, cultural,and urban aspects of Little Saigon.

• Create a multi-cultural entertainment and retaildestination.

• Establish physical connectivity within the po-tential market area to create a sense of placeand determine if current vehicular and pedes-trian circulation inhibit this goal.

• Improve the physical appearance of privateproperty by creating new development and re-vitalizing existing businesses and buildings.

• Improve the physical appearance of privateproperty by designing strong architecturalstandards and a landscape program.

• Determine an appropriate signage program toidentify properties and businesses.

• Recommend implementation strategies to turnthe vision into reality.

In total, the city posed twenty separate questionsfor the panel to address. During the studyprocess, the panel synthesized information fromthe briefing materials, the stakeholder interviews,and the tour and then consolidated the city’s con-cerns into a single question:

How can the city of Westminster and thecitizens of Little Saigon sustain and en-hance this unique cultural and commercialbase?

The Study AreaWestminster is located in Orange County inSouthern California, neighboring Anaheim, Gar-den Grove, and the oceanfront cities of Seal Beachand Huntington Beach. The city had an estimatedpopulation of 95,896 in 2006, and as a whole largelyreflects the suburbanization patterns of OrangeCounty within the larger Southern CaliforniaConsolidated Metropolitan Area.

The study area, known as Little Saigon, is definedas the area within the city of Westminster startingjust west of Magnolia Street and continuing alongBolsa Avenue for approximately one and a halfmiles until just east of Ward Street, and incorpo-

Revitalization is chal-lenged by fragmentedownership patterns, datedarchitectural design, andinconsistent signage.


rates some parcels to the north extending as far asSabre Lane. Little Saigon’s spine is Bolsa Avenue,which runs through the center of the study areaand connects with California SR-39 (Beach Boule-vard), one of the city’s major thoroughfares andcommercial corridors. The area is also easily ac-cessible by two highly-traveled freeways, SR-22and I-405.

The emergence and growth of Little Saigon issolely attributable to geopolitical events that cul-minated in April 1975 with the fall of the formerRepublic of South Vietnam and the commence-ment of the on-going displacement of its citizens.Founded in 1870 as a Presbyterian TemperanceColony, Westminster was a bedroom communitywith a white majority who benefited from theWorld War II defense industry boom.

After the fall of Saigon in 1975, anti-communistVietnamese fled the now former Republic of SouthVietnam and many were relocated to militarybases around the United States, including CampPendleton, in Southern California. Some Viet-namese resettled in Westminster and opened busi-nesses along Bolsa Avenue, which had begun todecline since the opening of the Westminster Mall.Others settled in the neighboring communities ofSanta Ana and Garden Grove.

A second wave of immigration occurred in the1980s, with many immigrants of Chinese-Viet-namese ancestry settling in this area of OrangeCounty. According to the 2000 Census, Westmin-ster has a Vietnamese-American population ofjust over thirty percent. Little Saigon’s populationis primarily made up of Vietnamese and Chinese,but Hispanics, Whites, Laotians, and Cambodiansalso populate the area.

Over the following decades, the Vietnamese busi-nesses grew and soon Vietnamese business own-ers began building shopping malls in the area, in-cluding the Asian Garden Mall and Little SaigonPlaza, along with smaller mom-and-pop shops.There are numerous restaurants and servicesgeared to the Vietnamese community, includingmulti-lingual banks. The area is home to severalnewspapers, radio and television stations, and aburgeoning music industry that serves a world-wide Vietnamese community.

Single-family homes and several trailer parks sur-round the commercial district, many of which arewalled off from the shopping areas and the street.The area has a mainly suburban, low density char-acter, with strip shopping centers, low-densityuses, six lanes of traffic on Bolsa Avenue, and verylimited pedestrian activity.

While Little Saigon caters mostly to the Viet-namese-American community, the city and localbusiness owners are interested in expanding itscustomer draw, including attracting tourists visit-

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

Westminster

Location map.

1

30

55

5

5

405

ORANGECosta MesaIrvine

Huntington Beach

Coronance

od

Santa AnaLong Beach

Anaheim

R

Los Angeles

Westminster

P a c i f i cO c e a n

Regional map.


Saigon has grown to over one million square feetof private commercial infill development. Althoughit may at first seem like a typical sprawling subur-ban commercial strip, Little Saigon stands as aunique place where Vietnamese-Americans canfind not only uncommon goods and services, butalso a cultural reference point. Little Saigon issimilar in the American cultural mosaic to Brook-lyn, New York at the turn of the last century.While physically unremarkable, both areas pro-vide an important ethnic enclave inside a largecity. Immigrants join together to pursue an im-proved standard of living, while at the same timepreserve their cultural roots and practices. In Lit-tle Saigon, as also happened in Brooklyn, the latergenerations are moving away from the old neigh-borhood and maintain minimal ties to the area.Little Saigon would therefore benefit by broaden-ing its appeal to both local residents and the na-tional Vietnamese community.

During the panel process, the members concludedthat there are several opportunities that LittleSaigon could leverage to coalesce their neigh-borhood into a complete place and draw an ex-panded customer base to the area. These oppor-tunities include:

• Enlarging its retail/commercial mix and scopeof activity;

ing Southern California and nearby attractionssuch as Disneyland. In 1996 a local business ownerdesigned a pedestrian-friendly bridge that wouldconnect several of the shopping centers. However,the community rejected the bridge as being tooheavily Chinese in its design and the project wasdropped. The city has recently approved the con-struction of two decorative arches at the commu-nity’s Ward and Magnolia Street entrance points.The cast iron arches, which will depict the journeyof Vietnamese-Americans since the end of theVietnam War, are viewed as a first step in devel-oping Little Saigon into a destination.

Study Area Development IssuesThe panel recognizes that Little Saigon is impor-tant not only to the city of Westminster, but alsoto Vietnamese-Americans at large. Since its un-planned inception over thirty years ago, Little

Asian Garden Mall is oneof the few examples of amedium-density shoppingmall in Westminster.

The area is dominated bylow-density strip malls.


• Increasing and diversifying its housing inven-tory to include housing for seniors, live/workunits, affordable- and market-rate multi-familyhousing, rental units, and for sale products;

• Promoting and expanding entertainment usesby constructing cinemas, live music venues, andoutdoor cultural events; and

• Providing more cultural and educational activi-ties such as museums and art programs.

The panel also concluded that there is no clear, co-herent, and consolidated vision for what LittleSaigon may be over the coming years. Many plansand suggestions have been advanced that have noclear commonality or consistency between them.None of these development plans offer strategiesfor unifying the area.

To date, development in Little Saigon has favoredan incremental, project-driven approach. In thepanelists’ experiences, this type of approach isrelatively easy to execute and the attendant pub-licity generates some positive, short-term momen-tum for other development. However, this incre-mental approach will not produce a long-term,sustainable development base for Little Saigon.Specifically, in the absence of a guiding framework,a strategy that is dependent on unknown variablessuch as land availability, public sentiment, andever-changing market conditions is not likely tocreate a complete foundation for the area. Fur-thermore, the lack of a framework creates uncer-tainties for investors and uses, and generally re-sults in uses that do not compliment each other.

The panel observed that Little Saigon is at or neara critical and timely opportunity. The city and thestakeholders of Little Saigon have the opportu-nity to shift the development paradigm from in-cremental to transformational. This would involvea joint effort to create a complete vision for thearea. While this may be daunting at first, the panelbelieves that such an approach will create signifi-cant long-term potential, considerably greaterthan an ongoing incremental approach. A trans-formational approach that includes a fully realizedvisioning process will require participation andengagement from the city, civic and cultural

organizations, property owners, businesses, anddevelopers.

In recommending a transformational approach forthe near- and long-term development in the LittleSaigon area, the panel is mindful that the follow-ing specific issues currently constrain redevelop-ment of the study area.

• Code violations and enforcement matters con-tinue to plague commercial businesses andproperties in the Little Saigon area. The city re-ports an on-going challenge in code compliancein the area. During the panel’s stakeholder in-terview process, the panel was repeatedly ad-vised that many businesses and property own-ers do not speak English, and do not understandthe necessity for, or complexities of, code com-pliance. To the panel, the issue of code compli-ance, including payment of state-mandatedsales taxes, is a problem that could dissuade thecity from investing significant time and re-sources in Little Saigon.

• Current land use patterns, parcelization pat-terns, and zoning all impede concentrated devel-opment and perpetuate the linear, low-densitycharacter of the area.

• Traffic patterns and volumes, parking issues,and pedestrian circulation conflicts abound. Thecity has installed medians and added some traf-fic signal improvements, yet these remain belowthe standard for high-density, urban develop-ment.

• City resources and policies do not provide forconventional redevelopment initiatives in LittleSaigon. The entire city is currently designated aredevelopment area, and traditional funds forredevelopment are programmed into the citycapital improvements budget. This renders taxincrement financing—a major traditional tool ofredevelopment—unavailable. Furthermore, thecity has adopted a pay-as-you-go approach byspecifically precluding itself from financinglong-term facilities projects and participating inpublic-private ventures.

The panel addressed these development chal-lenges in an overall framework of findings andrecommendations.


The Panel’s FrameworkAfter reviewing the substantial market studiesavailable in the briefing materials and visiting theLittle Saigon area over a three-day period, thepanel chose to organize its responses to the city’squestions in terms of three framing elements.These elements will guide the policies that areneeded to support Little Saigon’s reinvestmentand revitalization for the immediate future andbeyond. The three framing elements are:

• A Physical Framework for Transformation

• The Substance of Transformation

• Roles and Responsibilities in theTransformation

These framing elements convey the essence ofa successful revitalization program for LittleSaigon. For the most part, the panel’s findingsand recommendations are directed to the nearand intermediate term.

Summary of FindingsFrom a purely physical point of view, Little Saigonis not a classic redevelopment or revitalizationproject area. Although it has major physical anddesign challenges to its continued expansion andevolution, its businesses appear vibrant and thriv-ing today. Additionally, the name Little Saigoncovers a larger geographic area than was definedfor the purpose of the panel. This name does notcommunicate that the defined study area is theworld-wide center of the Vietnamese communitythat was displaced from the former Republic ofSouth Vietnam, and their descendants. A stronger,more compact physical identity, together with amore appropriate name could better representthe unique commercial and cultural importanceof the area.

A coherent, consistent vision for the future build-out of the study area is a prerequisite for a co-hesive place to emerge out of what has been alargely unplanned evolution of over 1 millionsquare feet of development. An agreed-upon vi-sion by all the stakeholders will make it possiblefor private and public interests to make informedland use and development decisions. Such a visionwill also help these decision-makers balance thetrade-offs required to introduce public and civicspace that will complement and reinforce ongoingprivate development.

An array of place-making tools can be customizedto support and facilitate ongoing development andrevitalization. The panel’s specific suggestions inapplying these tools are meant to be illustrativeonly. A visioning process involving all majorstakeholders should specifically examine andadopt more definitive guidelines on such mattersas districts and their land use character, density,composition, and agreed-upon boundaries.

A traffic-calming medianinstalled by the city.

Westminster, California, October 1–4, 200713

As it stands now, Little Saigon is viewed asan amorphic entity, with no clear startingand ending point and no center. The panelsees a need to define the broader area gen-

erally perceived to be Little Saigon, to distinguishthe area from other Little Saigons in the UnitedStates, and to capture the opportunity for a moreconcentrated urban core as the central focal pointof the larger area.

The area is made up of a unique set of discrete,strongly interconnected commercial districts thattogether could become Downtown Saigon USA.The area along Bolsa Avenue should be dividedinto specialized districts, each with their owndraw and purpose that would be more compactthan the current mile and a half, ribbon-like studyarea.

The districts suggested by the panel in the balanceof this report are illustrative of the differentiationthat could be achieved. The specific character andgeographic boundaries of these districts shouldemerge from a development and revitalization vi-sioning process in which all community stakehold-ers participate.

Planning for Special DistrictsAn overall physical and functional plan will benecessary to create a well-defined series of dis-tricts that are interconnected visually and physi-cally in order to support new business, culture,recreation, and entertainment opportunities.To assist the city and community stakeholdersin creating the districts, the panel has created aseries of illustrative districts that endeavor tostrengthen and improve what exists, provide newopportunities for future growth, and create an-chors that diversify the market base and charac-ter of Little Saigon.

Outdoor Food/Produce DistrictThe Outdoor Food/Produce District would formthe western gateway into Little Saigon with anAsian-themed food market. This district would in-clude both indoor and outdoor produce and foodsales, such as ornamental plants, flowers, and veg-etables.

Asian Village DistrictThe Asian Village District would create a dense,traditional, Asian retail center that would expand

A Physical Framework for Transformation

Recommended special-ized districts along BolsaAvenue.


and include Moran and West State streets. Thisdistrict would add infill commercial and residentialuses while creating parking behind the buildings.The centerpiece of this district should be a plazaand open space on Bolsa Avenue and MoranStreet.

Cultural DistrictA Cultural District would reinforce Little Saigonas the cultural heart of Vietnamese-America witha National Vietnamese Cultural and LanguageCenter, a hotel and conference center, and an artscenter and galleries. This district would also in-clude a Vietnamese Center for Entrepreneurshipthat would encourage and guide the developmentof locally-owned businesses and be a central voicefor local business leaders.

Media DistrictLittle Saigon is already the national and interna-tional center of Vietnamese information and en-tertainment. The Media District would furtherfocus on radio, film, television, music, print media,and advertising production to enhance this role.The district should engage the community withglass-walled, street-front studios, similar to NBC’sToday Show and should also create an outdoorvenue for live productions.

Furniture/Garden/Outdoor DistrictThe Furniture/Garden/Outdoor District wouldstrengthen the existing market in Asian furnitureand garden and outdoor furnishings, and wouldconcentrate new products and services such as ar-chitects, interior designers, landscape contractors,building contractors, kitchens, and housewares.

The panel encourages the city and community toidentify additional future district opportunitiesthat strengthen existing connections and enhanceLittle Saigon’s unique sense of place by filling ingaps in the commercial fabric. Districts would in-clude compatible uses that logically expand mar-ket opportunities such as cinemas, theaters, art,and galleries. In addition, land use policy andplans should create new opportunities for urban,mixed-use residential, office, and retail spaces.


Place-making is the core physical strategyfor a substantive transformation of Lit-tle Saigon. The building blocks of place-making include changing zoning practices,

changing land uses, using design ordinances, andintroducing public and civic spaces into the com-mercial fabric.

During its time in the study area, the panel ob-served several strengths and weaknesses thatcould, respectively, help or hinder the area’s fu-ture development. One of the most obvious ad-vantages is the area’s high traffic counts. Trafficcounts along Little Saigon’s major spine, BolsaAvenue, range from 35,000 to 40,000 vehicles perday. Although this creates a conflicted pedestrianenvironment, it does demonstrate that the area iswell traveled and points to a potentially highercustomer base.

Secondly, market demand for available space inthe area is high and reflected in a low area-widespace vacancy rate. Most buildings within thestudy area are occupied, contributing to a vibrantarea with high market growth. Another advan-tage is the presence of a well-established ethniccommunity. The community provides a built-in,loyal client base. Vietnamese-Americans andother groups from Westminster and surroundingareas regularly visit Little Saigon. In addition, theethnic base has a strong entrepreneurial ethic.

Little Saigon also has several limitations to place-making. One of the most formidable limitations isthe absence of vacant land. To grow, the area willneed to intensify existing developed propertiesthrough design or expand linearly at its currentdensity.

Zoning is another major challenge for Little Saigon.The panel strongly encourages the city to considernew zoning tools such as form-based codes thatwould bring a sense of compatibility and scale tothe area. Current, Euclidean zoning as it stands

now does not promote an identifiable vision andcreates incompatible uses, such as industrial nextto residential, reducing the resident’s quality oflife. In addition, the corridor is not pedestrian-friendly; the lack of parking compounds this prob-lem and constrains additional development.

In weighing the strengths and limitations of LittleSaigon, the panel concluded that the study areadoes not need to be revitalized per se, as it is asuccessful area in terms of traffic and commercialuses. The panel also concluded that the fundamen-tal challenges are transitioning older and conflict-ing uses, such as low density warehouses and anti-quated strip shopping centers, unlocking land forfurther private development, and introducingpublic and civic spaces.

To approach this challenge via place-making,three tools are discussed in detail on the follow-ing pages: a change in zoning through a meanssuch as form-based codes, an improvement ofarchitectural design standards and signage, anda specific use for each district within the panel’sillustrative framework.

Form-Based CodesThe panel believes that a new approach to zon-ing is needed to entice developers and propertyowners to consider redevelopment. Form-basedzoning should be applied and tailored to the spe-cific districts of Little Saigon to encourage rede-velopment and improve the area’s physical ap-pearance. While the existing zoning would remainand existing businesses could operate withoutchange, the form-based overlays would help busi-nesses or developers maximize development op-portunities consistent with the character of theparticular district.

Form-based codes are relatively new and evolvingplanning tools. Rather than concentrate on type ofuse, they regulate the key aspects of urban form,

The Substance of Transformation


such as a building’s scale, its proximity to thestreet, and its public facade. Different sections ofan area can be coded for varying densities, mini-mum and maximum building heights, and percent-ages of frontage types.

Form-based codes make streets and buildingswork together to create a desirable public realm,while subsequently adding value to surroundingproperties. For example, form-based overlayzones have been successfully used in Fort Worth,Texas, and West Palm Beach, Florida. These zonesprovide incentives to developers by allowingbonus density in exchange for incorporating cer-tain uses, providing public open space, and agree-ing to other project-related attributes deemed inthe public interest.

Form-based codes are not to be confused with de-sign guidelines; they have a separate purpose. Inmost cases form-based codes regulate the generalfootprint of a building, not its architectural vernac-ular or use. Moreover, developers and the publicare put at ease with the certainty provided byform-based codes, and in turn, certainty providesless opposition, increases investment, and helpsexpedite the review and approval process. Seewww.formbasedcodes.org for additional informa-tion.

Adoption of form-based codes would be one of theend results of an overall visioning process for thearea. Once the shared vision has been reached, itwill need to be converted into an objective codethat replaces contradictory provisions in otherordinances. Form-based codes can be optional,not mandatory, but developers are encouraged tofollow the codes in return for such rewards as ex-pedited review, tax increment financing, and taxcredits. Places such as Petaluma, California, andArlington County, Virginia, have used form-basedcodes to encourage economic development andto create visually-appealing, pedestrian-friendlycommunities.

Form-based codes would be especially helpful indiminishing the variety of building shapes andheights in Little Saigon. The buildings could stillretain a distinct style, but form-based codes bringan underlying uniformity that would create visualrhythm along the street (e.g., no large setbacks,no blank facades, parking in rear).

Form-based codes could also be employed tostrengthen pedestrian connections between thestreet and buildings and between buildings byrequiring pathways, landscaping. and wider side-walks as well as by introducing public places intothe privately-developed fabric of Little Saigon.

Bolsa Avenue, the mainartery in Little Saigon, ischaracterized by high traf-fic counts and very fewpedestrians.


Properties that do not currently contribute to thelong-term plan could be encouraged to redevelopthrough the use of a form-based overlay zone. Forexample, the surrounding mobile home parkscould be placed in an overlay zone to allow formore height and density, in return for a develop-ment that meets stated public community objec-tives and standards.

The panel recognizes that the potential redevelop-ment of such a property is a highly sensitive issueand clearly understands the city’s position againstusing eminent domain. Therefore, such an initia-tive would need to come from the owners of themobile home parks, or other property interest. Anyplan that involves a form-based overlay would inall likelihood need to incorporate the replacementof affordable units, such as a bonus density tiedto the provision of affordable housing within thedevelopment.

The panel emphasizes that new zoning tools wouldnot require an owner to close a business or rede-velop a property, but would provide incentives todo so. Furthermore, the panel strongly advisesthe city against pushing for redevelopment by up-zoning properties. Form-based overlay zones thatincorporate specific public design and space re-quirements will ensure that the city receives anappropriate quid pro quo for increasing land valuethrough increased intensity of uses.

Architectural Design Standards andSignageFor an area to have a sense of place, it should beimmediately evident to visitors and residentsthat they have arrived at a unique destination.This is an important tool in place-making. In addi-tion to improved signage, this place-making canbe accomplished through strong architectural andlandscaping design.

Comments made to the panel during the inter-view process made it clear that the current archi-tectural regulations are not working. They pro-mote a canned version of Asian architecture thatis not authentically Vietnamese. Furthermore, thepanel was advised that some projects have eithernot been required to comply with current designguidelines or the results have not been successful.

The panel recommends that the city revisit thesubject of design guidelines and consider retainingone of the many firms that specialize in this typeof practice. This process would include creating apattern book of agreeable design standards. ManyVietnamese relate to the French-Vietnamese stylethat includes interpretations of Beaux Artes toArt Deco. There should be an opportunity to in-clude these styles within the districts.

The existing signage in Little Saigon is a con-strained suburban style that does not add to itsvisual appeal. Moreover, the business signs seemto serve the needs of local residents as they arewritten most prominently in Vietnamese (withsome English translation). If the city wishes todraw non-Asians and tourists, a comprehensivesign program is needed that would include:

• Special thematic gateway signs (such as thearches that are presently being considered),

• Signs that indicate the location of parkingareas, and

• Directional signs that indicate the locationsof districts, businesses, and areas of note.

While the panel believes that signage designwould need to have some basic consistency, it

Vietnamese signage dis-courages potential non-Vietnamese customers.

does not have to be uniform across Little Saigon,Different districts could have their own style ofsignage. For example, the Media District couldhave a modern motif, while the Cultural Districtcould use traditional designs.

The panel also suggests livening up the signagethrough the use of color and form. Culturally-ap-propriate, animated, or neon signs could invigo-rate a retail, restaurant, or entertainment destina-tion. In Washington, D.C.’s Chinatown, localChinese artists designed lighted artwork that nowhangs over the Metro station entrances. While notonly attractive, these pieces also serve as beaconsfor those looking to enter the subway.

Land Use Changes in the ProposedDistrictsThe district concept can be further refined bylooking at specific development clusters withineach district. Little Saigon has several successfulprojects that can anchor and spur future develop-ment. However, new development must considerzoning, design guidelines, district themes, and ad-joining uses. This approach ensures the develop-ment of complimentary uses and encourages con-nections among specific projects. Defining theseclusters will also help the city concentrate on areasof development rather than on single projects.

In order to accomplish specific goals for eachdistrict, the city should consider changing specificzoning for land uses. The panel offered the fol-


lowing specific suggestions for some of the pro-posed districts.

The Asian Village DistrictChanging the industrial zoning to mixed-use vil-lage zoning would dramatically improve the feel ofthe Asian Village District by eliminating incom-patible uses and encouraging residential develop-ment. This change would build upon the area’snew housing for seniors, the Asian Garden Mall,the planned parking structure, and the continuousstreet network.

Side streets could accommodate pedestrian-friendly street retail uses and sidewalk cafes.Any new development should address its ownparking demands and help correct the parkingproblem. Infill development in this district couldtake the form of linear buildings that would be ad-jacent to the proposed parking structure and thesides of the mall. In addition, the opportunity fora plaza and gathering space in front of the mallshould be explored.

The Media DistrictChanging the industrial zoning to media districtzoning in this area would eliminate incompatibleuses, encourage pedestrian activity, and support24-hour use. This change would build upon thearea’s concentration of print media, radio, musicstudios, and film industry uses. The area could bethe hipper, younger, edgier part of the neighbor-hood and could include coffee shops and gatheringplaces, Vietnamese cinema, and a new home forthe Vietnamese film festival.

Land use changes alongBolsa Avenue.


The district should encourage exhibition space forvisual arts and entertainment production visibleto the street. Such lively expression of mediacould be enhanced by a scrolling electronic mes-sage board with news headlines, as in New YorkCity’s Times Square. A contemporary architecturestyle with live/work space and lofts would be ap-propriate for this district. The district’s uses, ap-peal, and energy would keep younger generationsin the area.

The Cultural DistrictAn area should be designated for creating a Cul-tural District that would expand upon the AsianGarden Village mixed-use area. This area wouldinclude more retail and affordable residential uses,as well as public plazas for the Tet Festival activi-ties or other events. This district could also includea hotel, meeting rooms, cultural center, exhibitionspace, language school, city services substation,

business assistance center, sculpture garden, orother uses that would reinforce the non-commer-cial cultural aspects of the community. The planfor this area should include structured parking.

In the panel’s opinion, these three areas together—the Asian Village District, the Media Districtand the Cultural District—are the core of a down-town area for Little Saigon. This geographic cen-ter of activity will support the highest density ofdevelopment, integrate public and civic spaceswith commercial and residential uses, and facili-tate pedestrian activity and connections betweendistricts.

Specific developmentclusters within the spe-cialized districts.


The panel was surprised to discover that thereare few civic organizations that are focusedon the betterment of Little Saigon. Most ofthe interplay on the development of Little

Saigon occurs between the city and individualproperty owners. Further, the panel was equallysurprised that property owners in the Little Saigonarea do not have an organization to representthemselves as a whole before the city.

Civic organizations, private sector interests, andthe city are all equally important participants inarriving at a complete vision for Little Saigon.Each of these parties also has a role in the realiza-tion of the vision. The recommended roles and re-sponsibilities of each are addressed in the balanceof this section.

Civic OrganizationsThe panel observed that civic organizations arenotably not active in the evolving developmentof Little Saigon. Further, their lack of presencewithin the Little Saigon area is equally notable.Without the participation and presence of suchorganizations, it is unlikely that a complete placeis achievable for Little Saigon.

A cursory review of the current landscape indi-cates that there are over ninety organizationsserving the Asian and Vietnamese communities inOrange County. Of these, approximately twodozen are located in Westminster. Generally, theseorganizations are national and international in af-filiation and cover a broad scope of interests, in-cluding arts and culture, seniors, students, poli-tics, religion, mutual assistance, and media. Thereis much breadth in these civic organizations, yetthere appears to be limited capacity in terms ofstaff and resources.

The appropriate role of civic organizations is two-fold. The first is to provide mutual assistancewhere there is none now. The second is to sponsor

traditional civic functions and facilities in theareas of arts, culture, and education.

Technical Assistance CenterLittle Saigon’s business community is founded ona strong entrepreneurial spirit, yet the panelfound a lack of Vietnamese-specific business assis-tance centers that could advise community mem-bers on how to start and maintain their busi-nesses. Despite Orange County’s largeVietnamese population, its U.S. Small BusinessAssociation branch office has only one Viet-namese-speaking staff member, and neither thecity of Westminster nor the Chamber of Com-merce appear to have any capacity in this area.

A survey of merchants in Seattle’s Little Saigonfound that most businesses had a strong desire toexpand to serve a wider customer base, but fewhad the capacity, resources, or knowledge to do so.The survey also found that Vietnamese-Americanbusiness owners often had little knowledge ofmarketing techniques, especially to those outsidethe community, and wanted to know more aboutmerchandising and storefront appeal. This type oftraining for merchants could be especially valu-able in attracting tourists to Little Saigon.

To this end, the panel recommends that the cityestablish a Vietnamese Business Technical Assis-tance Center (VBTAC) or Center for Entrepre-neurship that would offer targeted, culturally-spe-cific technical assistance with:

• Business planning and business operations;

• Market assessment, marketing, andmerchandising;

• Local regulation, permitting, and licensingcompliance; and

• Accounting systems, tax compliance, andinventory control.

Roles and Responsibilities in theTransformation


The VBTAC could serve as a culturally specificconduit for community members to access infor-mation about development initiatives and for thecity to access feedback from community members.The city could partner with a community organi-zation such as a business group, community col-lege, or media outlets, or an existing technical as-sistance provider like the Orange County SmallBusiness Development Center (SBDC). Possiblesources of funding include public sources such asthe Small Business Administration and the De-partment of Housing and Urban DevelopmentCommunity Development Block Grants, slidingscale fees from clients, and private sources such aslocal Vietnamese-American property owners.

Civic and Cultural InitiativesAs outlined in the preceding sections, there is anacute opportunity to enhance civic, cultural, andcommunity activities in Little Saigon. If this con-cept is endorsed by a vision process and its associ-ated physical plan, then there is a clear role forcivic and cultural organizations. This role is princi-pally in the location of desired facilities within Lit-tle Saigon and the sponsorship of their fundingand operation. Examples of such facilities includecultural centers, museums, language schools, andsenior centers. City leadership in enabling suchcivic and cultural organizations through assistancein land assembly and non-monetary support of fa-cility development and program mission will beessential.

Private Interests: Property Owners andArea BusinessesThe panel observed the need for a common, cen-tralized voice to address the whole of LittleSaigon, not just individual property concerns.After considering several options to accomplishthis unified voice, the panel suggests that the cityencourage property owners and businesses tosponsor a Business Improvement District (BID)for Little Saigon. A BID would provide thestrongest demonstration of support by private in-terests to fully participate in the revitalization ofLittle Saigon. In contrast to a business interestlobbying association, a BID would clearly signalthat property owners and area businesses are fi-

nancially committed to the long-term developmentand operation of Little Saigon.

A BID is a public-private partnership in whichproperty and business owners of a defined areaelect to make a collective contribution to the main-tenance, development, and promotion of theircommercial district. It is, in some ways, similar tothe management of a suburban shopping mall or aresidential community association. BIDs arefunded through special assessments collected fromthe property owners in the defined boundaries ofthe district and the proceeds are used to improve,promote, and maintain the area. The scope of ac-tivities would include:

• Operating and maintaining common publicareas;

• Establishing uniformity of operations, such ashours, signage, landscaping and lighting, andmarketing between and among existing busi-nesses;

• Coordinating and facilitating public events andpromotional activities;

• Providing a liaison between businesses and thecity regarding regulatory and code matters;

• Serving as the conduit for shared parking solu-tions;

• Serving as the centralized voice of propertyowners and businesses in dealing with the cityon operations, planning, and development mat-ters; and

• Advertising, marketing, and promoting LittleSaigon as a destination.

The panel strongly believes that the BID shouldbe sponsored by the private interests in LittleSaigon in order to express their commitment tothe long-term operation and viability of the areaas a significant commercial and retail destination.The city, as described in the following section, hasa role in facilitating the formation and start-up ofa BID.


The City’s RoleThe panel has specifically not endorsed a tradi-tional redevelopment process, nor does it view oneas feasible under current city policies and re-sources. Therefore, the panel views the city’s roleas blended between a leader/facilitator, an enlight-ened, steady-handed regulator, and a public sectorentrepreneur. The panel does not believe there isa clear road map for this type of blended role.However, a guiding principle for such a role statesthat if private interests and civic groups do notengage after the city initiates, then the city shouldredeploy its time and resources elsewhere. Inother words, the panel is not confident that asolely city-sponsored effort will yield long-termresults in Little Saigon.

The panel recommends that the city begin engag-ing private interest and civic groups through anorganized and managed visioning process. This vi-sioning process would involve all of Little Saigon’sstakeholders, as well as the major Vietnamese-American civic organizations. The end goal wouldbe to arrive at a common point of agreement onthe physical form for Little Saigon, the configura-tion and composition of districts, and the introduc-tion and location of public and civic space. The vi-sioning process should also address developmentpriorities and connections between districts.

In making this recommendation, the panel is cog-nizant of the time and level of commitment in-volved in such a visioning process. While it is timeconsuming and often frustrating to balance con-flicting community interests, the panel’s experi-ence is that such a process will serve not only toset a decision framework for the years ahead, butalso to serve as a forum to build good will andcommon understanding among all principal partic-ipants.

Arlington County, Virginia’s experience with aform-based codes visioning project for its Colum-bia Pike area would be an appropriate examplefor the city to consider. More information aboutthis project can be found on line at:

http://www.columbiapikepartnership.com/FORM/92928.html. After the visioning process is com-pleted and the private sector has demonstrated anongoing commitment, the planning, zoning, andother regulatory guidelines are to be drafted andadopted.

In summary, therefore, the primary recommenda-tions of this panel are for the city to engage in avisioning process for Little Saigon and, upon itscompletion, to pursue an appropriate physicalplace-making strategy based on the particular vi-sion that emerges. The panel offers the followingadditional recommendations to the city:

• Assign staff to specifically handle code enforce-ment education and economic and communitydevelopment specifically for Little Saigon.Preferably this staff would be fluent in Viet-namese and maintain an office in the LittleSaigon area.

• Serve as a source of start-up capital or servicein lieu of essential civic activities such as a BID.

• Facilitate private land assembly for key consoli-dation parcels such as industrial uses in themixed-use village district and the older shop-ping center with fractured ownership.

• Participate as a joint venture partner for proj-ects of merit that would not occur without cityinvolvement.

These additional recommendations, while not sub-ordinate to the headline recommendation of thepanel, are of a lower priority. The panel has in-cluded these recommendations as a guidepost to amore intensified role the city can play in revitaliz-ing Little Saigon, provided the other stakeholdersengage with the city during the visioning process.


It was not apparent to the panel until well intoits second day in Westminster that LittleSaigon is a truly unique place. The panel re-mains uncertain as to whether the stakehold-

ers and residents of the city fully appreciate thatLittle Saigon, as presently constituted and as itmay evolve over the years ahead, is a one-of-a-kind, authentic place that compares with theFrench Quarter in New Orleans, Charlestown inBoston, or Chinatown in San Francisco in itsuniqueness, if not in its physical presence.

Parallel StoryThe panel would like to share the results of a simi-lar Advisory Services Panel with Little Saigon’sstakeholders. In 2007, ULI conducted a panel inAnnandale, Virginia. This suburb of Washington,D.C., is home to a strong ethnic community, enjoyseasy access to two of the region’s freeways, and issplit by a significant commercial corridor thatbrings business to the area but also impedespedestrian activity.

The sponsor asked the panel to recommend strate-gies for revitalizing the area as a more vibrant,pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use center compatiblewith adjacent residential areas. Just as in LittleSaigon, the Annandale panel recommended a vi-sioning process followed by a place-making strat-egy based on that vision.

Annandale, VirginiaAnnandale, Virginia, is a suburban communitynear Washington, D.C., and is home to a signifi-cant collection of Korean, Hispanic, and other eth-nic businesses. Beginning in the 1950s, Annandalegrew from a rural crossroads into a major retailcenter. As major retailers moved away over time,immigrant entrepreneurs identified an opportu-nity and invested in Annandale. Today, Annandalecontains more than 2 million square feet of com-

mercial space that houses a wide variety of ethnicbusinesses drawing customers from throughoutthe metropolitan area and beyond. Many residentsperceive Annandale to be a declining commercialarea despite retail rents, land prices, and vacancyrates competitive with the region’s most success-ful retail areas.

Responding to community concern about Annan-dale’s decline, Fairfax County invited a ULI Advi-sory Services panel to suggest strategies to revi-talize Annandale as a thriving business centerwith strong urban design connections to adjacentneighborhoods. The panel recommended a consis-tent, long-term strategy that engages the entireAnnandale community and encourages incremen-tal development. Specific recommendations in-cluded:

• Build future development efforts on Annan-dale’s diversity and regional prominence as anethnic retail destination. Plans should recognizethat national retailers are not likely to locate inAnnandale due to the close proximity of othermajor retail centers. However, Annandale has abuilt-in strength as an ethnic retail hub that canserve as the foundation for a unique sense ofplace and thriving business community.

• Engage the entire Annandale community in re-vitalization efforts by adopting communicationstrategies that bridge cultural differences. Ef-fective communication strategies should use amulti-lingual approach, engage established eth-nic community institutions, including churches,and work with the leadership of the regionalethnic communities.

• Separate perception from reality. Many resi-dents perceive Annandale to be in decline, al-though its retail rents and land values competewith affluent retail areas. Property and busi-ness owners have little incentive to change be-cause their businesses are performing well.

Conclusion


Community perception of decline may be ad-dressed by encouraging façade rehabilitation,promoting multi-lingual signage, and enhancingthe streetscape environment. All efforts shouldbe targeted at making the commercial area un-derstandable and open to all ethnic groups rep-resented in the community.

• Create a unified vision for Annandale’s future.Specifically define what words like town center,community, walkability, and density shouldmean for Annandale. Create working relation-ships between property owners, residents, busi-nesses, and government to achieve the vision.

• Plan for an incremental, cumulative redevelop-ment process that builds strategically on publicand private investments supported by the mar-ket. Remain focused on the vision and persis-tent on building on opportunities.

Transforming Little SaigonLittle Saigon has the potential to reach its full ex-pression as a distinctive place, as well as to serveas a long-term economic asset to the city. It is nowtime for the stakeholders to consolidate their col-lective interest into a vision for achieving this po-tential, beginning with introducing public andcivic spaces. A continued build-out of LittleSaigon that incorporates, connects, and concen-trates well-designed public spaces and appropri-ate civic places can provide enduring enrichmentto the area’s commercial, cultural, and social fab-ric, as well as to the fiscal health of the city.


J. Kevin LawlerPanel ChairWest Palm Beach, Florida

Lawler is the managing partner of the N-K Ven-tures LLC and has over thirty years of experienceas a real estate finance and deal advisor. In 2001,he co-founded N-K Ventures LLC, a developmentcompany principally engaged in urban residentialinfill and mixed-use projects in Florida. The com-pany’s development activities reflect the philoso-phy of its founding principals—the creation ofhigh-value urban places. In joint venture withLennar and the Related Group of Florida in 2005,the company completed the Moorings—a mixed-use development of 378 units, 25,000 square feetof commercial space and marina in Palm BeachCounty. In joint venture with ZOM and RMCProperties, N-K Ventures LLC is developing theParamount—a vertical, mixed-use project neardowntown Orlando that includes an urban Pub-lix supermarket, 22,000 square feet of additionalcommercial space, and 314 residential units, allon a two-acre site.

For N-K Ventures, Lawler underwrites all newdevelopment projects, maintains investor and cap-ital relationships, and manages all transactionalaspects of the company’s ventures and invest-ments. He also manages subcontractor relation-ships, and he identifies and qualifies new businessopportunities.

Lawler’s real estate career has involved over fivebillion dollars of development, financing, and in-vestment transactions throughout the UnitedStates. Prior to starting in the development busi-ness, he was a partner in the real estate advisoryservices practice of a major financial services firmin its Washington, D.C., and Miami offices. Lawlerhad a national practice in advising developers, cor-porations, nonprofit organizations, and public enti-ties on their financing and large-scale develop-

ment transactions. This practice included REITformations, commercial property portfolio struc-turing and recapitalizations, corporate real estateventures and leasing, large-scale developmentprojects, public-private development, and financ-ing transactions. Lawler has also assisted a num-ber of Florida cities in the creating, evaluating,and negotiating public-private transactions, in-cluding West Palm Beach, Daytona Beach, MiamiBeach, Miramar, and Temple Terrace.

Lawler is an active member of ULI and hasserved in its leadership group and also in numer-ous committees and councils. He has participatedon numerous ULI Advisory Services panels andproject analysis teams, and served as a vice-chairof the SE Florida Council and chair of TreasureCoast Annual Real Estate Conference in 2006. InOctober 2000, ULI recognized his service with theRobert O’Donnell Award.

Lawler has lectured extensively on real estatedevelopment and financing, including lectures atthe Harvard Business School, the Wharton School,the Georgetown University Business School, theGeorge Washington University Business School,the University of Maryland, and the Miami LawSchool. Prior to relocating to south Florida, heserved on the Economic Development Committeeof the Washington Board of Trade for several years.He is a graduate of Michigan State University andreceived a MCP degree from the Kennedy Schoolof Government at Harvard University, where hewas a Mellon and Ford Foundation Fellow.

John HixenbaughSt. Petersburg, Florida

Hixenbaugh is a land use planner for the law firmof Trenam Kemker. With over twenty years of ex-perience in municipal planning, Hixenbaugh hasbeen responsible for the approving over 2,000public and private projects, including mixed-use,

About the Panel


commercial, office, residential, hotel, and institu-tional developments. His areas of specialization in-clude urban and commercial redevelopment, his-toric preservation, ordinance preparation,architectural design, and master land use plan-ning.

Prior to joining Trenam Kemker, Hixenbaughserved as the zoning official for the city of St. Pe-tersburg, Florida. He has also worked as a cityplanner for the Village of Schaumburg, Illinois,and the cities of Port Orange and Ormond Beach,Florida. Since 1990, Hixenbaugh has been a mem-ber of the American Institute of Certified Plan-ners (AICP). He has been a member of ULI since1996 and has served on two other Advisory Ser-vices panel assignments. Hixenbaugh has been aspeaker at several programs on architectural de-sign and community redevelopment sponsored bythe American Planning Association, and his workin these areas has garnered a number of profes-sional awards.

Hixenbaugh holds a Bachelor of Fine Arts and aMaster of Arts in Urban and Regional Planningfrom the University of Florida. Since 2005, he hasbeen a student at the Stetson University Collegeof Law in St. Petersburg where he is pursuing hisjuris doctor. Upon graduation, Hixenbaugh in-tends to practice land use and real estate law.

Michael J. MaxwellMiami Shores, Florida

Maxwell is founder and managing partner ofMAXWELL+Partners LLC, a real estate devel-opment, project management, and investment ad-visory firm. Over the course of his career he hassuccessfully led real estate organizations in plan-ning and developing land, homes, retail, office, in-dustrial, and resort properties. As an advisor andproject manager, he has worked out, restructured,and strategically repositioned over $500 million inreal estate assets for corporate, private, and insti-tutional investors.

Involved in real estate development for over thirtyyears, Maxwell founded MAXWELL+Partners in1992 to assist lenders and investors in restructur-ing loans and assets through strategic planning,

due diligence, asset management, marketing, fi-nancial planning, capitalization, and mergers andacquisition services. Clients include investmentbankers, banks, savings and loans, life insurancecompanies, brokers, private investors, and gov-ernments. His work includes negotiating complexenvironmental issues, establishing and leadingsuccessful real estate development and financialservice firms, restructuring companies and assets,and leading mergers and acquisitions. Maxwell isan expert witness in real estate and developmentissues in state and federal courts.

Maxwell has built MAXWELL+Partners into aniche developer, project manager, and advisor. Hismost recent work includes developing and reposi-tioning medical offices, clinics, and residential carefacilities, and leading the development of luxuryhomes on in-fill sites in Miami’s upper east side.His work has been honored throughout his careerwith awards for historic preservation, innovativeindustrial buildings, and outstanding renovationprojects.

Maxwell holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from theUniversity of Texas at Austin, where he studiedarchitecture and city planning, and a Master ofPlanning degree from the University of Virginia,with specializations in real estate and urban de-sign. Maxwell began his career with a Texas homebuilder, has held positions in government, was vicepresident of Codina Development leading the ini-tial development of the award-winning $400 mil-lion Beacon Center in Miami, advised institutionsand governments, worked-out loan portfolios, andpartnered in developing Caribbean hotels and lux-ury homes. A skilled and effective communicator,he is known for his organizational and leadershipexpertise.

As a member of ULI, Maxwell serves on the Ex-ecutive Committee of the Florida/Caribbean Dis-trict Council as vice-chair of Membership. He is aFlorida licensed real estate and mortgage brokerand holds the AICP designation from the Ameri-can Institute of Certified Planners. He is a boardand executive committee member of the GreaterMiami Urban League and is founding chairmanof New Urban Development LLC, the affordablehousing development arm of the Urban League.A graduate of Leadership Miami and former


executive committee member, he has served onnumerous community boards in various capaci-ties including Miami County Day School, pastchairman of Bonnet House, past chairman ofthe Dade Heritage Trust, the Florida Trust, co-chair of Gusman Theater and president of theUniversity of Virginia South Florida Alumni as-sociation. He served as an adjunct professor inthe Florida International University GraduateSchool of Business in real estate development andmanagement and is a guest speaker on issues ofurban development.

Trang D. TuSeattle, Washington

Tu has been working in community-based devel-opment, urban planning, and public policy for thepast fifteen years. Currently, she is the principalof her own consulting practice based in Seattle.In this capacity she has completed a diverse rangeof projects including economic revitalization ofSeattle’s Little Saigon, recovery and rebuilding inNew Orleans including organizing and advocacywith the Vietnamese community, economic revital-ization in Seattle’s underinvested and ethnicallydiverse communities, affordable housing financ-ing, civic engagement of underserved communi-ties, farm worker housing, and tribal economicdevelopment.

Prior to establishing her consultancy, Tu was a se-nior associate at Cedar River Group, a public pol-icy consulting firm, and served as special assistantfor housing and community development to for-mer Seattle Mayor Paul Schell. She also worked inthe city’s strategic planning office as a station areadevelopment planner for Seattle’s light rail sys-tem, focusing on the segment to be constructedthrough the Rainier Valley, an ethnically diverseand historically underinvested community. Priorto her roles with the city of Seattle, Tu was aneighborhood planner with Interim CommunityDevelopment Association, a nonprofit organiza-tion in Seattle’s Chinatown/International District.

As a first-generation Vietnamese-American, Tuhas community, professional, and personal experi-ence with numerous diaspora Vietnamese commu-nities and business districts including those inSeattle, Boston, New Orleans, San Jose, Westmin-ster, and overseas. She holds a Master in UrbanPlanning degree from the Harvard GraduateSchool of Design and a Bachelor in Economicsdegree from Harvard College.

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

an advisory services panel report li ttle …uli.org › wp-content › uploads › uli-documents...

Documents