RECONNECTING PASADENA
Pasadena, California
Technical Assistance Panel | March 2026
AtlantaLos Angeles
Urban Land Institute
The Urban Land Institute (ULI) is a global,
member-driven organization comprising
more than 48,000 real estate and urban
development professionals dedicated to
advancing the Institute’s mission of shaping
the future of the built environment for
transformative impact in communities
worldwide. ULI’s interdisciplinary
membership represents all aspects of the
industry, including developers, property
owners, investors, architects, urban
planners, public officials, real estate brokers,
appraisers, attorneys, engineers, financiers,
and academics. Established in 1936, the
Institute has a presence in the Americas,
Europe, and Asia Pacific regions, with
members in 84 countries.
About
ULI Los Angeles
ULI Los Angeles is a district council of the
Urban Land Institute, serving a diverse
membership of more than 2,000
professionals across the public, private, and
nonprofit sectors. The district council
supports ULI’s mission by convening local
leaders, advancing thought leadership, and
addressing critical issues shaping the
region’s built environment. Through
programs, panels, and initiatives, ULI Los
Angeles fosters collaboration and
knowledge exchange to promote equitable,
sustainable, and resilient development
throughout Southern California.
Technical Assistance Panel
(TAP) Program
ULI’s Technical Assistance Panel (TAP)
program provides expert, multidisciplinary
guidance to communities and organizations
facing complex land use and development
challenges. TAPs convene volunteer
professionals with diverse expertise to analyze
issues, engage stakeholders, and develop
actionable recommendations over a short,
intensive timeframe. Drawing on ULI’s broad
network and commitment to objective,
nonpartisan advice, the TAP program delivers
practical strategies that help sponsors
advance projects, policies, and plans that
support vibrant and sustainable communities.
The views expressed in this report are those of
the authors/panelists and do not necessarily
reflect the views of their affiliated organizations.
TAP Sponsor
City of Pasadena
Panel Members
Richard Bruckner
City of Anaheim
Panel Chair
Ava Bromberg
Creative Urban Solutions
Joshua Foster
JAF
Shmel Graham
Ashurst
John Keisler
Sunstone Investment Group
Kacy Keys
Praxis Development Group
Jakub Rozga
Eldridge Acre Partners
Judith Taylor
HR&A Advisors
Lisa Trifiletti
Trifiletti Consulting
About
ULI Member Leadership
Lewis Horne
CBRE
District Council Chair
Walter Maynard
BRIDGE Housing Corporation
TAP Committee Co-Chair
Jonathan Nettler
PlaceWorks
TAP Committee Co-Chair
Jonathan Watts
Tighe Architecture
TAP Committee Co-Chair
Technical Assistance Panel
ULI Staff
Kellie Kao Miles
Executive Director
Lisa Cahan Davis
Senior Manager
Molly Honnef
Associate
Sallyann Price
Report Writer
Nick Pinkham
Report Designer
ULI
Contents
Executive Summary 1
Introduction and Panel Charge 5
Key Themes Identified 9
Proposed Implementation Framework 16
Conclusion 34
About the Panel 36
ULI
Acknowledgments
ULI Los Angeles would like to thank the City of Pasadena for inviting ULI to conduct this study and for providing the panel with the information and resources needed to conduct it. The panel also wishes to acknowledge the wealth of planning work undertaken by the Reconnecting Pasadena initiative and thank the numerous stakeholders who generously shared their time and insight with the panel.
1 Montefiore Einstein Health System: Envisioning a Transit-connected Campus in the Bronx, New York Executive
Summary
2 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Executive Summary
Driving Transformation
The Reconnecting Pasadena initiative
represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity
to transform a 50-acre former freeway
corridor into a unified, connected, and
future-oriented district at the heart of the city.
Following the 2022 relinquishment of the
SR-710 northern stub from the State of
California to the City of Pasadena, the City
has advanced a comprehensive Vision Plan
process to reimagine the corridor, a plan
grounded in community input, restorative
justice, and long-term sustainability.
As the City moves from planning toward
implementation, it faces a new set of
challenges: how to deliver a complex,
multi-decade project; how to coordinate
public and private investment; how to
maintain community trust and accountability;
and how to ensure that the project’s benefits
are both meaningful and enduring.
The Task at Hand
The panel was asked to develop a
comprehensive implementation framework
that addresses funding assembly, delivery
acceleration, governance structure, and
long-term operations and maintenance, while
integrating City Council’s restorative justice
goals, urban design concepts, sense of scale,
and flexibility over a multi-decade buildout.
Rather than revisiting the vision itself, the
panel focused on the systems and decisions
required to carry that vision forward. Its work
emphasizes how the City can move from
concept
to execution: structuring governance,
sequencing investment, aligning roles, and
establishing the
conditions necessary to
attract both public and private capital while
delivering on community priorities.
This r
eport intended to be a roadmap for that
transition. While the recommendations extend
through buildout and stewardship, the
immediate focus is on the foundational
actions needed to shape that process.
3 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Key Themes Observed
Across its analysis, the panel identified
several foundational themes and broad
actions that should guide the project
moving forward.
Establish a clear and durable “north star. ”
A formally adopted mission and set of guiding
objectives should serve as an operational tool,
not a symbolic statement. In a project that will
span decades, this framework provides
continuity across political and market cycles
and creates a shared basis for evaluating
tradeoffs as conditions evolve.
Approach the project as a phased,
outcomes-driven process. Implementation
should be structured as a sequence of
defined stages, each with clear outcomes
that unlock the next phase of work. This
approach allows the City to manage
complexity, align decision-making with
readiness, and maintain forward momentum
without overcommitting too early.
Create governance structures that balance
accountability and execution. As owners, the
City must remain actively engaged in setting
policy, overseeing compliance, and ensuring
alignment with community priorities. At the
same time, in order to attract the right partners,
a focused and capable delivery structure is
needed to coordinate partners, streamline
decision-making, and sustain progress.
Reduce uncertainty to attract investment.
Private capital will play a critical role in
delivering the project, and its participation
depends on clarity and predictability.
Establishing well-defined land use and urban
design frameworks, streamlined approval
processes, and a coordinated infrastructure
strategy will help reduce risk and make the
project more competitive in the marketplace.
Center restorative justice throughout
implementation. Restorative justice should
be embedded across all phases of the
project, shaping both process and outcomes.
This includes formal mechanisms for
community participation, clear accountability
measures, and strategies that deliver tangible
economic, social, and cultural benefits to
impacted communities.
What Must Happen First
The panel emphasized that the project's most
consequential decisions will be made long
before new buildings rise from the corridor.
The choices made now will shape the pace of
future progress and influence the project's
ability to attract investment, maintain public
confidence, and deliver lasting public value.
Though this report contains detailed
recommendations for the lifecycle of the
project, from groundwork to stewardship, the
panel urges that particular attention be paid to
the foundational early stages.
Before anything else, this project needs:
• A clear mission and definition of success
• Dedicated, sustained leadership and
organizational capacity
• A structure for decision-making and
accountability
• Technical readiness and infrastructure
planning
• Early funding and investment strategies
• Ongoing community participation and trust
4 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Implementation Framework
To operationalize these themes, the panel
recommends a phased implementation
framework that organizes the project into a
sequence of coordinated steps that build one
on another and evolve to address questions
of governance and restorative justice:
Phase 0: Vision Study
Formalize and adopt a clear mission and
guiding objectives to serve as the project’s
long-term foundation.
Phase 1: Pre-Development and Groundwork
Advance technical studies, define land use
capacity, establish a community participation
structure, secure initial funding, and organize
a dedicated City-led project team.
Phase 2: Entitlement, Governance,
and Policy
Complete the Specific Plan and
environmental review, define financing and
delivery strategies, and establish a
development authority or equivalent structure
to manage project delivery.
Phase 3: Implementation and Procurement
Prepare and issue procurement packages,
initiate infrastructure delivery, and bring
development partners to the project under
clearly defined requirements and community
benefit commitments.
Phase 4: Ongoing Development
and Operations
Oversee long-term buildout, operations, and
maintenance through a financially self-
sustaining model that supports public spaces,
infrastructure, and community programs.
The Road Ahead
The Vision Plan process has laid critical
groundwork. These recommendations are
designed to help the City move forward with
clarity, structure, and momentum. The work
ahead will require sustained leadership,
coordination, and adaptability.
If carried forward with discipline and shared
purpose, the Reconnecting Pasadena initiative
has the potential to do more than transform a
site. It can repair a historic divide, reconnect
neighborhoods, and establish a national model
for equitable, resilient urban redevelopment.
5 Montefiore Einstein Health System: Envisioning a Transit-connected Campus in the Bronx, New York Introduction and
Panel Charge
6 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Historical Context
The State Route 710 (SR-710) North Stub is
the product of a mid-20th-century freeway
plan that was never fully realized, but whose
impacts have shaped Pasadena for more
than five decades.
In 1964, the California Highway Commission
approved a route for the final segment of what
was then known as the SR-7 freeway, intended
to connect Long Beach to Pasadena. While the
full extension was ultimately halted due to
sustained community opposition and legal
challenges, construction of the northern
interchange in Pasadena proceeded in the
early 1970s. This process displaced
thousands of residents and businesses, many
from low-income and minority communities,
and severed once-walkable connections
between residential areas and Pasadena’s
central business district.
The result was a partially completed freeway
segment—commonly referred to as the “stub”
or “ditch”—whose physical infrastructure has
remained in place ever since, functioning as
an internal barrier rather than a connector.
7 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
A Turning Point
Legislation introduced in 2020 enabled the
California Transportation Commission
(Caltrans) to relinquish control of the SR-710
North Stub to the City of Pasadena,
contingent on an agreement with Caltrans.
The relinquishment was formally approved in
June 2022 and completed that August.
This process transferred approximately 50
acres of transportation right-of-way,
extending from Union Street to Columbia
Street, into local control. The transfer not only
assigned responsibility for operations and
maintenance, but also permanently
eliminated the possibility of completing the
freeway connection.
Finally, the City has regained full authority to
determine the future of this centrally located
corridor. The opportunity is substantial—few
cities have the chance to reshape 50
contiguous acres of centrally located land
within an already built-out urban fabric—but
so are the complexities.
Reimagining the Corridor
To meet this moment, the City launched the
Reconnecting Pasadena initiative, a
comprehensive visioning effort led by a
multidisciplinary consultant team to
reimagine the corridor as a civic asset.
This work, greatly endorsed by recent City
Council actions, reflects a substantial
investment of time, analysis, and community
engagement. It integrates multiple
workstreams—including technical analysis,
economic modeling, urban design,
sustainability strategies, and a robust public
process—to develop a long-term vision. The
vision includes a Restorative Justice
Framework, which seeks to acknowledge and
address historical harms while shaping future
policy and investment decisions.
The emerging vision proposes reconnecting
the corridor to the surrounding street grid;
introducing new housing, jobs, and public
spaces; and transforming an auto-oriented
landscape into a pedestrian-focused, climate-
responsive district. It also positions the site
as a potential “living laboratory” for district-
scale sustainability strategies aligned with
the City’s Climate Action Plan.
8 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
The Challenge at Hand
After years of sustained planning and
engagement, the initiative is now
approaching a critical inflection point: the
transition from defining a vision to
determining how that vision can be realized.
In a briefing with Mayor Victor Gordo and City
leadership, panelists heard a clear
articulation of both the urgency and
complexity of the moment. City officials
emphasized the importance of establishing a
governance and delivery approach that can
sustain momentum over time while
remaining accountable to the public. They
also underscored the need to balance speed
THE PANEL 'S CHARGE
The panel was asked to develop a
comprehensive framework addressing five
core areas:
Governance: What organizational structure or
entity can best guide the project over time
while balancing independence, accountability,
and expertise?
Funding and Value Capture: How can the City
assemble a viable financing strategy,
including the use of tools such as enhanced
infrastructure financing districts and public-
private partnerships?
Delivery Strategy: What project delivery
models and phasing approaches can
accelerate implementation and manage risk?
Community Equity and Restorative Justice:
How can the project meaningfully address
past harms, prevent displacement, and
ensure inclusive participation and benefits?
Operations and Long-Term Stewardship:
What structures and revenue models can
sustain the district over time without
burdening the City’s general fund?
and certainty—particularly in attracting
investment and advancing infrastructure—
with meaningful community engagement and
responsiveness to long-standing concerns
about equity, displacement, and
neighborhood compatibility.
Leadership emphasized that this project is
uniquely sensitive, both politically and
historically. Decisions related to governance,
implementation, and public oversight will
require careful calibration to ensure that the
City retains appropriate control while enabling
a process that is efficient, coordinated, and
capable of delivering results at scale.
9 Montefiore Einstein Health System: Envisioning a Transit-connected Campus in the Bronx, New York Key Themes
Observed
10 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
What the Panel Heard
The panel approached the Reconnecting
Pasadena project as a rare and complex civic
undertaking: the opportunity to reshape a
significant portion of the city within an
already built and historically layered urban
fabric. Across its review of briefing materials,
stakeholder input, a site tour, and interviews
with national precedents, the panel’s
observations converged on a set of
interrelated themes that speak less to any
single decision than to the conditions
required for long-term success.
11 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
A clear vision must anchor
the long-term process.
Because the project will unfold over multiple
decades and through changing economic,
political, and community conditions, the
panel emphasized the importance of
establishing a clear and durable “north star”
at the outset.
The proposed guiding principle—moving
Pasadena from division to connection—
captures the project’s central ambition, but its
practical value lies in how it informs decision-
making. The panel stressed that a formally
adopted mission and set of guiding
objectives should function as a continuous
reference point, shaping choices related to
land use, infrastructure, partnerships, and
community benefits.
This is not a symbolic exercise. In long-
duration projects, drift is common: priorities
shift, conditions change, and incremental
decisions accumulate in ways that can erode
the original intent. A clearly articulated
framework helps prevent that drift by:
• Aligning stakeholders around shared
goals
• Providing continuity across political and
administrative transitions
• Creating a basis for evaluating tradeoffs
as they arise
In this sense, the vision is not the starting
point of the project, but an operational tool
that must be actively maintained and applied
across its lifecycle.
The project must be phased
and outcomes-driven.
The panel found that the most effective way to
manage the project’s complexity is through a
structured, phased approach in which each
stage establishes the conditions necessary for
the next. More than a sequencing exercise, it is
a strategy for managing risk, aligning
investment, and building momentum over time.
The proposed framework—from initial visioning
through pre-development, entitlement,
procurement, and long-term operations—
reflects a progression from uncertainty to
increasing clarity and commitment. Early
phases are characterized by testing, alignment,
and groundwork; later phases focus on
execution and sustained performance.
A key implication here is that major decisions
are not made all at once. Instead, they are
distributed across phases, with each stage
responding to a different set of questions:
• What is possible? (technical feasibility,
capacity, constraints)
• What is intended? (land use, community
priorities, project definition)
• How will it be delivered? (governance,
financing, partnerships)
• How will it perform over time?
(operations, maintenance, revenue,
community impact)
This structure allows the City to move
forward deliberately while avoiding premature
commitments that could constrain future
flexibility or increase risk.
12 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Governance is the critical
determinant of success.
The panel repeatedly returned to the principle
that process drives outcomes: a project of
this scale and duration cannot succeed
without a governance model capable of
sustaining focus, coordinating across
multiple actors, and making timely, informed
decisions over decades.
Governance sits at the intersection of public
accountability, operational efficiency, and
market credibility. Review of comparable
projects underscored a consistent pattern:
projects that achieved their intended
outcomes did so through governance
structures that were both clearly empowered
and purpose-built for delivery, not layered
onto existing systems as an afterthought.
This does not point to a single prescribed
model. Rather, it establishes a set of criteria
any governance approach must meet:
• Clarity of roles and decision-making
authority
• Capacity for sustained attention
• Insulation from short-term disruption
while maintaining public accountability
• Ability to coordinate complex financial,
technical, and community functions
• Commensurate technical knowledge and
experience
Without these elements in place, even
well-conceived plans risk delay,
fragmentation, or loss of strategic direction.
13 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Upfront investment is
required to unlock long-
term value.
A consistent theme across the panel’s
discussion was that the site, in its current
condition, does not inherently generate value.
Significant public investment, particularly in
infrastructure, planning, and entitlements, will
be required before private capital can be
effectively engaged.
This reality reframes the early phases of the
project. Rather than focusing primarily on
vertical development or end uses, the initial
priority must be to:
• Establish technical feasibility
(transportation, utilities,
environmental conditions)
• Define a coherent and market-responsive
project envelope
• Secure early funding to advance
planning, design, and critical enabling
infrastructure
• Align with key public and private agency
partners whose work is interdependent
with the site
The panel noted that in comparable projects,
these upfront, often substantial investments
were essential to de-risk the opportunity and
create the conditions for subsequent
development. While this can create pressure in
the near term, it is also what enables long-
term value creation, both financial and civic.
Certainty and coordination
are essential to attract
private capital.
From a development and investment
perspective, the attractiveness of the project
will depend less on its conceptual ambition
than on the clarity and predictability of its
implementation environment. Private capital
responds to clearly defined rules and
expectations, streamlined and coordinated
approval processes, known timelines, and
financial transparency.
The panel emphasized that de-risking the
development process directly increases the
likelihood of participation and the value of
that participation. In practical terms, this
suggests the importance of:
• A single point of coordination for
developers and investors
• Pre-defined and ministerial
entitlement pathways
• Alignment between public infrastructure
delivery and private development timing
These elements do not eliminate risk, but
they make it legible and manageable, which
is essential for attracting investment at the
scale envisioned.
No single delivery or
ownership model will fit all
components of the project.
Given the diversity of uses anticipated,
ranging from infrastructure and civic space to
research, commercial, and residential
development, the panel found that a flexible,
multi-model approach will be necessary.
Different components of the project will have
different capital requirements, risk profiles,
operational characteristics, and market
dynamics. As a result, delivery strategies may
vary across the site and over time, including
combinations of:
• Publicly delivered infrastructure
• Ground lease arrangements for
specialized uses
• Parcel sales or other mechanisms for
both market-rate and affordable
residential development
Maintaining this flexibility is critical. Market
conditions will evolve over the life of the
project, and the City’s ability to respond to
those changes, without fundamentally
altering its guiding objectives, will be a key
determinant of success.
14 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
The City will retain a central
and ongoing role throughout
implementation.
Even as new governance or delivery
structures are considered, the panel
underscored that the City’s role as owner
does not diminish over time; it evolves.
Core City responsibilities are likely to include:
• Dedicating organizational capacity,
including an interdisciplinary "strike
team" empowered to coordinate
departments and sustain momentum
over the life of the project
• Establishing and maintaining the
regulatory and policy framework
• Delivering or coordinating
major infrastructure
• Ensuring compliance with
approved plans, agreements, and
environmental commitments
• Managing relationships with the
community and key institutional partners
This continued involvement is particularly
important in maintaining alignment between
long-term public goals and day-to-day
implementation decisions. It also reinforces
the idea that governance structures should
not replace the City’s role, but rather enable it
to be exercised more effectively within a
complex, multi-decade project.
Restorative justice must be
embedded in the structure of
the project.
The panel recognized the City’s existing work
to define a Restorative Justice Framework and
found that the central challenge is one of
implementation: how to translate principles
into durable, measurable outcomes over time.
To be effective, restorative justice cannot
operate as a parallel initiative. It must be
integrated into the core mechanisms of the
project, including:
• Governance, through representation
and oversight
• Planning, through land use
and program decisions
• Procurement, through requirements
for participation and inclusion
• Revenue allocation, through community
benefit structures
This integration ensures that restorative
justice is not dependent on individual
decisions or moments in time but instead
carried through the full lifecycle of the
project. If done well, it also allows the project
to serve as a model for how large-scale
development can address historic harms
while creating new economic and cultural
opportunities for past and present residents.
15 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Long-term success depends
on sustained commitment
and adaptability.
Finally, the panel emphasized that this project
should be understood not as a single
undertaking, but as a long-term civic effort
that will evolve over decades. Conditions will
change—economically, politically, and
socially—and the project must be structured
to adapt without losing its core direction.
This requires:
• Governance that can persist and adjust
over time
• Financial strategies that remain viable
across market cycles
• Ongoing engagement with the
community and stakeholders
• A willingness to revisit and refine earlier
decisions when warranted
The panel’s review of comparable projects
reinforced that the most successful efforts
combined clear initial direction with the
flexibility to respond to change. Achieving
that balance will be essential to realizing the
full potential of the project.
16 Montefiore Einstein Health System: Envisioning a Transit-connected Campus in the Bronx, New York Proposed
Implementation
Framework
17 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
To translate the key themes into forward
progress, the panel organized its
recommendations around a framework and
timeline for phased implementation. Each
phase establishes the conditions to unlock the
next, evolves governance structure, delivers on
core objectives, and builds toward long-term
financial and environmental sustainability.
While many activities will advance
concurrently, the panel emphasized that early
success depends on first establishing a clear
vision, dedicated implementation capacity,
durable governance structures, and the
technical and financial groundwork
necessary to support future entitlement,
procursement, and development decisions.
The most critical work at this point lies in
the near term, with the project's overall
trajectory shaped by decisions made in
Phases 1 and 2. The immediate priority is
establishing the foundation for
development: creating the organizational,
governance, and implementation framework
capable of carrying the vision forward.
18 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Phase 0: Vision Study
This stage establishes the foundation for the
future of the Reconnecting Pasadena
initiative. Before advancing into detailed
planning, entitlement, or delivery decisions,
the City must adopt a north star—a clear and
shared vision that defines both the purpose
of the project and the principles that will
guide it over time. Without this clarity, the
project risks losing coherence as it moves
through multiple phases and political cycles.
Here, the panel has drafted a set of guiding
principles and objectives intended as a
starting point for refinement and formal
adoption by the City, informed by leadership
priorities and early community input.
19 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Guiding Principle
From division to connection:
A generational investment in
Pasadena’s neighborhoods and future.
This principle reflects the project’s core
intent, to transform a long-standing physical
and social divide into a unifying civic asset
that benefits the entire city.
Mission Statement
To transform the former 710 corridor into a
unifying civic asset that reconnects
Pasadena’s neighborhoods, advances
restorative justice, and creates inclusive
opportunities for housing, mobility,
economic vitality, and public space—
implemented through durable, financially
and environmentally sustainable strategies
over time.
Guiding Objectives
The panel identified a set of core objectives that
should inform all subsequent phases of work.
These objectives are intended to be applied
consistently—across planning, governance,
financing, and implementation decisions.
Restitch the City: Reconnect neighborhoods
through walkable streets, public spaces, and
integrated infrastructure.
Advance restorative justice: Address past
harms through meaningful, community-
informed outcomes.
Create a transportation and mobility hub:
Integrate regional transit, local circulation,
and active mobility systems.
Enable new neighborhood development:
Support mixed-income housing, local-serving
retail, jobs, and civic uses.
Ensure long-term financial and
environmental sustainability: Structure the
project to support operations and
maintenance without reliance on the general
fund, and align with the City’s climate goals
and long-term resilience strategies.
Maintain flexibility over a multi-decade
buildout: Allow development strategies to
evolve as conditions change.starting point
for refinement and formal adoption by the
City, informed by leadership priorities and
early community input.
KEY OUTCOMES
By the conclusion of this phase, the City
should have a formally endorsed vision and
guiding framework that:
• Clearly defines the project as a unifying
civic investment, not solely a
development opportunity
• Forms the dedicated interdepartmental
staff strike team needed to proceed with
through future phases.
• Establishes a consistent set of guiding
objectives to inform all future decisions
• Reflects input from City leadership and
early stakeholder engagement
• Provides a durable foundation for
planning, governance, and
implementation
These outcomes enable the transition into
Phase 1 with clarity about what the project
is intended to achieve and how success will
be measured.
20 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Phase 1: Pre-Development and Groundwork
Phase 1 translates the City’s vision and
guiding objectives into the technical,
financial, and organizational foundations
required for implementation.
This phase is both analytical and strategic. It
requires rigorous technical work—on
infrastructure, land use, and environmental
considerations—alongside early decisions
about governance, funding, and community
participation. These efforts must proceed in
parallel and inform one another.
Phase 1 is the most consequential period.
While this report contains detailed guidance
for all stages, and the most visible changes
won't be visible for several years from now, the
project's entire trajectory depends on early
decisions. How should the project be
organized? What investments and actions are
required to unlock opportunity? How can we
sustain momentum and remain accountable?
The work of Phase 1 is to establish the
conditions to begin to answer these questions.
21 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Defining the Development
Framework
A central task of Phase 1 is to establish the
overall framework for how the site can be
developed. This work should be approached
as an iterative process, in which land use
assumptions are continuously evaluated
against technical constraints, market
conditions, and community priorities.
Rather than producing a fixed plan, the City
should use this phase to test a range of
scenarios, refining them over time to arrive at
a development approach that is grounded in
real-world conditions while retaining flexibility
for future refinement.
This process includes:
• Establishing a preliminary range of land
uses and development intensity
• Identifying development “sub-areas” that
can support phased implementation
• Defining the overall gross square footage
and mix of uses at a high level
• Testing how different configurations
perform in terms of feasibility, cost,
community impact, and infrastructure
capacity
Technical and Environmental
Analysis
Technical analysis underpins all aspects of
Phase 1: infrastructure capacity, particularly
related to transportation, utilities, and site
conditions, will ultimately define what is
achievable. This work should proceed in
close coordination with the development
framework, ensuring that assumptions are
continuously tested and refined.
Key areas of analysis:
• Transportation systems, circulation
patterns, and integration with regional
mobility networks
• Utility infrastructure, including water,
power, and stormwater systems
• Site conditions, including grading,
environmental constraints, and potential
remediation needs
• Development pad configurations and
sequencing of infrastructure investments
The City should, in parallel, define an
environmental review strategy that aligns
with the project’s phased approach. This
includes determining how environmental
analysis can be structured to support both
near-term implementation and long-term
flexibility, including the relationship between
project-level and program-level review.
Governance and Staffing
During Phase 1, the City retains primary
responsibility for advancing the project and
should establish a dedicated organizational
structure to support this work.
The panel recommends the formation of an
integrated, interdisciplinary project team that
serves as a central hub for coordination
across all workstreams.
The team should include:
• A project executive with overall
responsibility for delivery
• A full-time project manager focused
exclusively on this initiative
• Representation from key City functions,
including planning, public works,
transportation, economic development,
and community engagement
• A coordinated, co-located working
environment that enables rapid
communication and decision-making
This structure lays the groundwork for more
formal governance approaches in later
phases, while enabling the City to move
quickly and cohesively in the near term.
22 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Community Participation
and Restorative Justice
Framework
Phase 1 is also the point at which the City
establishes the structure for ongoing
community engagement and begins to
operationalize its restorative justice
commitments.
The panel recommends creating a formal
Community Advisory Group (CAG) early in this
phase, with a clearly defined role that extends
throughout the project lifecycle. This group
should be responsible for helping shape
development priorities, establishing evaluation
criteria, and ensuring accountability to
community-defined outcomes.
At this point, the City should begin solidifying
a restorative justice framework that moves
beyond principles to actionable strategies.
This includes:
• Defining how community input will be
incorporated into decision-making
• Establishing metrics for measuring
progress and outcomes
• Identifying opportunities for workforce
development and small business
participation
• Outlining community benefit mechanisms,
such as community lease revenue
participation or CBA requirements.
Funding Strategy and Early
Resource Mobilization
Advancing into Phase 2 will require
substantial financial resources—particularly
to support planning, technical analysis, and
environmental review—to unlock long-term
value. Phase 1 should therefore include the
development of an initial funding strategy,
program budget, and grant management
approach, along with efforts to secure
early-stage funding.
While the City may contribute resources,
external funding sources will be critical.
These could include:
• Local funding mechanisms and capital
improvement programs
• Regional transportation and air quality
funding
• State programs related to climate,
transportation, and infrastructure
• Federal grants and discretionary funding
opportunities
Establishing a coordinated approach to
funding early in the process allows the City to
align project priorities with available funding
opportunities, sequence work in a financially
feasible manner, and reduce reliance on any
single funding source.
Agency Coordination and
Partnerships
Given the scale and complexity of the project,
early and sustained coordination with partner
agencies is essential. This is particularly true
for entities responsible for transportation
infrastructure and regional mobility systems.
The City should establish formal alignment
mechanisms, such as memoranda of
understanding, to ensure that parallel
efforts, such as roadway modifications,
transit investments, and utility
improvements, are coordinated with the
overall development strategy.
Effective coordination in this phase reduces
the risk of delays, conflicting priorities, and
misaligned investments in later phases.
23 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
KEY OUTCOMES
By the conclusion of Phase 1, the City should
have a clearly defined and broadly aligned
foundation for advancing into entitlement
and implementation. This includes:
• A feasible, community-informed
development framework, including land
uses and overall program scale
• A refined project definition, including
phasing, infrastructure requirements, and
development capacity
• A coordinated environmental strategy
aligned with the phased development
approach
• An initial funding strategy and program
budget, with resources secured to
advance into Phase 2
• A formal structure for community
participation and early implementation of
restorative justice priorities
• Early alignment with key partner
agencies, particularly those responsible
for transportation and infrastructure
• Governance structure ready to launch.
Together, these outcomes reduce uncertainty
and enable the City to move into the next
phase with a clear understanding of both
opportunities and constraints.
24 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Phase 2: Entitlement, Governance, and Policy
Phase 2 moves the project from exploration to
definition. Building on the technical, financial,
and community groundwork established in
Phase 1, the City now formalizes the
development framework, secures entitlements,
and launches the governance and delivery
structures that will guide implementation.
This is the stage where key policy decisions
are made. It defines how the project will be
built, who will be responsible for delivering
different components, and how public and
private investment will be structured over
time. As in Phase 1, decisions made at this
stage will be crucial in shaping the success of
the long-term effort.
Phase 2 is fundamentally about reducing
uncertainty. By clarifying land use rules,
streamlining approvals, and aligning
governance and financing strategies, the
City creates the conditions necessary to
attract private capital and advance the
project with confidence.
25 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Project Definition and
Entitlement Strategy
The primary objective of Phase 2 is to
translate the development framework
established in Phase 1 into a formal
entitlement structure that can guide
implementation for decades. The panel
recommends the use of a single specific plan
with defined sub-areas. This approach
provides a consistent regulatory framework
while allowing for variation across different
parts of the site and flexibility over time.
The process should:
• Define the overall project description,
including land uses, development
intensity, and phasing
• Establish sub-areas that reflect distinct
conditions or programmatic priorities
• Create clear design standards and
development parameters
• Align community-informed land use
decisions with infrastructure capacity
and environmental constraints
A key goal of this work is to de-risk the
project for future development partners. By
resolving major land use and environmental
questions upfront, the City can reduce
uncertainty and create a more predictable
environment for investment.
To support this, the panel recommends
incorporating a design-compliance approval
pathway for future development that
conforms to the specific plan. This approach
Environmental Clearance
and Phasing Alignment
Environmental review should be structured to
support the project’s phased implementation
strategy. Rather than approaching
environmental clearance as a single, static
process, the City should align it with the
sequencing of development.
This may include project-level clearance for
early infrastructure and initial phases of
development and program-level clearance for
later phases, with the ability to tier additional
analysis as needed. This approach allows the
City to advance near-term projects while
preserving flexibility for future adaptation as
market conditions, technologies, and
community priorities evolve.
Establishing alignment between review and
phasing is critical to maintaining momentum
and avoiding bottlenecks.
allows projects to proceed without
discretionary review, provided they meet
established standards, reducing time and risk
for both the City and private partners
Governance Structure and
Development Authority
Phase 2 builds on the more formal
governance structure to support delivery. The
panel recommends the creation of a
dedicated development authority, a single-
purpose entity responsible for coordinating
development activities, managing contracts,
and advancing implementation.
Delivering a multi-billion-dollar, multi-decade
development requires a level of focus,
continuity, and operational capacity that is
difficult to sustain within traditional municipal
structures alone.
The proposed development authority would:
• Serve as a single point of coordination
for development partners
• Manage procurement and contracting
• Oversee land disposition, including
leasing and/or sale of parcels
• Administer financing tools and, where
appropriate, issue debt
• Manage revenue streams and support
long-term operations and maintenance
• Attract staff with expertise in large,
complex development projects
The City should retain a central and ongoing
role, responsible for establishing the regulatory
framework, defining community benefits and
restorative justice commitments, and ensuring
compliance with adopted policies.
This dual structure—City as policy-setter
and steward, authority as implementer—
allows the project to balance accountability
with efficiency.
Governance design should reflect both
expertise and representation. A small, focused
board (5-7 people) with clearly defined roles
and relevant experience can support effective
decision-making, while mechanisms for
community representation ensure continued
alignment with public priorities.
26 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Delivery Strategy and
Procurement Framework
With entitlement and governance structures
defined, Phase 2 also establishes how the
project will be delivered. The panel
emphasized that a single delivery model is
unlikely to be appropriate across all
components of the project.
Instead, the City should maintain flexibility
and align delivery strategies with the
characteristics of different project elements,
including public infrastructure and civic
assets, commercial or institutional
development (such as life sciences or
education uses), and residential
development. Each of these may involve
distinct ownership models, financing
structures, and procurement approaches.
From a development and investment
perspective, several factors that are essential
to acclerating participation and delivery:
• Clarity of vision and project identity,
supported by a compelling narrative
• Streamlined governance and approvals,
with a clear, consistent point of contact
• Infrastructure readiness, including
utilities, access, and parking coordinated
with development timing
• Certainty of outcomes related to
entitlement, timing, and cost, and
community benefit expectations.
Alternative Delivery Models
A range of delivery models should be
evaluated at this stage, including traditional
approaches and alternatives such as design-
build, progressive design-build, and design-
build-finance structures. Each model
presents distinct tradeoffs related to
allocation of risk between public and private
partners, cost certainty and pricing structure,
speed of delivery, and level of public-sector
control and oversight.
The appropriate model will vary depending on
the specific component of the project, but
several overarching considerations apply:
• Alignment with project goals and guiding
principles
• Allocation of risk to the parties best
positioned to manage it
• Capacity of the City and its partners to
effectively oversee delivery
• Market interest and willingness to
participate under proposed terms
Alternative delivery models can offer
advantages in terms of speed, coordination,
and innovation, particularly for complex
infrastructure components, but they also
require sufficient internal capacity and clear
governance structures to be implemented
successfully.
Financial Strategy and Value
Capture
While detailed financial structuring will
continue to evolve, Phase 2 is where the City
defines the overarching approach to funding
and value capture.
This includes:
• Evaluating financing tools such as tax
increment mechanisms, assessment
districts, and bonding strategies
• Determining how and when value created
by public investment will be captured and
reinvested
• Aligning financing strategies with
phasing and delivery approaches
The potential for value creation is significant
but must be intentionally captured. Public
investment in infrastructure and place-
making will generate increased land value;
governance and financing structures must
ensure that a portion of this value supports
project delivery, community benefits, and
long-term sustainability.
27 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
KEY OUTCOMES
By the conclusion of Phase 2, the City will
have established the formal framework
required to advance into implementation.
This includes:
• An adopted specific plan that defines
land use, development parameters, and
phasing
• A coordinated environmental clearance
strategy aligned with phased
development
• A defined governance structure, including
the establishment of a development
authority and a clear delineation of roles
in project delivery and oversight
• A comprehensive financial plan, including
funding sources and value capture
framework to support implementation
• A clearly articulated delivery strategy,
including procurement approaches and
potential use of alternative delivery
models
Together, these elements create the
structure, clarity, and confidence needed to
move into procurement and construction.
28 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Phase 3: Implementation and Procurement
Phase 3 marks the transition from planning
to action. The success of this work depends
on the work completed in earlier stages.
With entitlements secured, governance
structures established, and delivery
strategies defined, the City and its partners
move into active implementation.
This phase is where the project enters
the market and the public starts paying
attention. Procurement processes are
launched, development partners are
selected, and construction begins on
enabling infrastructure and early
phases of development.
Phase 3 is not simply about execution—it is
about maintaining alignment. The systems
established in earlier phases must now
function in real time, ensuring that development
proceeds efficiently while upholding the
project’s guiding principles, community
commitments, and long-term vision.
29 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Procurement Strategy and
Market Engagement
The central task here is to bring the project to
market in a way that attracts qualified
partners and delivers on the City’s objectives.
Procurement packages should be carefully
structured to reflect the delivery strategies
defined in Phase 2, including distinctions
across infrastructure, specialized districts,
and residential development. These
packages must clearly communicate
expectations related to design, performance,
community benefits, and long-term
stewardship.
Rather than a single procurement event, the
panel anticipates a sequenced and phased
approach, allowing the City and development
authority to:
• Test market interest through early
opportunities
• Refine procurement strategies based on
responses
• Align timing with infrastructure delivery
and market conditions
Clarity remains critical at this stage.
Development partners must be able to
understand the parameters of the
opportunity, including entitlement conditions,
approval pathways, and financial
expectations. The work completed in earlier
phases, particularly around de-risking and
streamlining approvals, becomes essential in
enabling a strong market response.
Implementation of
Infrastructure and Early
Development
Phase 3 includes the initiation of both public
infrastructure and initial vertical
development. The sequencing of these
efforts is critical, as infrastructure investment
enables development while early
development helps establish momentum,
identity, and revenue for the district.
Key activities during this phase include:
• Advancing enabling infrastructure such
as streets, utilities, and public realm
improvements
• Coordinating closely with regional
partners on mobility and transportation
investments
• Preparing development pads and
supporting site readiness
• Launching initial vertical development
projects in alignment with the phasing
strategy
The panel noted that early phases of
development should be carefully selected to
demonstrate viability, build confidence, and
support subsequent investment.
Governance and Oversight
During Implementation
As implementation begins, governance
structures established in Phase 2 move into
full operation. Responsibilities are
distributed across the City, the designated
governing entity, and supporting
stakeholders, requiring ongoing coordination
and clear delineation of roles.
The governing entity (such as a development
authority, if established) is expected to:
• Lead procurement and contract
execution
• Manage relationships with the
community, elected officials, and
development and construction partners
• Oversee project delivery and
performance
• Administer financial resources and
funding mechanisms.
The City will continue to:
• Oversee compliance with entitlements,
environmental requirements, and
community benefit commitments
• Manage ongoing planning work and
future phases of development
• Coordinate across departments and with
partner agencies
• Maintain accountability to the public and
elected leadership
This dual structure requires coordination to
ensure that efficiency does not come at the
expense of accountability or alignment.
30 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Operationalizing Restorative
Justice and Community
Benefits
Phase 3 is where restorative justice
commitments and community benefit
strategies move from planning into
implementation. These elements must be
embedded in procurement, contracting, and
project delivery, not treated as separate or
secondary initiatives, and supported by clear
contractual requirements and enforcement
mechanisms.
This includes:
• Incorporating equity and participation
goals into procurement requirements
• Establishing and enforcing targets for
participation by disadvantaged and
minority- and women-owned businesses
• Setting up the workforce development
and local hiring programs developed in
earlier phases
• Advancing community benefit
agreements and mechanisms for
shared value creation and community-
directed funds
• Implementing city-wide policies that
prevent further displacement with this
major investment
Agency Coordination and
Parallel Workstreams
Phase 3 involves multiple workstreams
advancing at once, including infrastructure
delivery, development procurement, and
regional transportation projects. Effective
coordination across these efforts is essential
to maintaining schedule and avoiding
conflicts that undermine project momentum.
The panel emphasized the importance of:
• Continued alignment with agencies such
as Caltrans and regional transportation
partners
• Clear communication channels between
project teams and partner organizations
• Ongoing management of dependencies
between infrastructure and development
timelines
KEY OUTCOMES
By the conclusion of Phase 3, the project
should have transitioned from planning to
delivery, with measurable progress across
multiple fronts. Expected outcomes include:
• Procurement packages issued and
advanced, reflecting defined project
requirements and priorities
• Selection of development and
construction partners for initial phases
of work
• Initiation of infrastructure and horizontal
development, aligned with phasing
strategy
• Implementation of community benefits,
workforce, and procurement
commitments established in earlier
phases
• Continued coordination with partner
agencies to ensure alignment of parallel
infrastructure investments
These outcomes signal that the project is
fully underway and positioned for sustained
development over time.
31 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Phase 4: Ongoing Development and Operations/Maintenance Phase 4 represents the long-term realization of
the Reconnecting Pasadena project. While
earlier phases focus on planning, structuring,
and initiating development, this phase is
concerned with sustaining and evolving the
district over time, ensuring that it functions as a
cohesive, high-performing civic asset.
This phase is not simply the continuation of
development activity, but the establishment of
a durable operational model. The success of
the project will ultimately be measured not by
what is built, but by how the district performs—
economically, socially, and environmentally—
over decades.
Phase 4 therefore centers on long-term
stewardship: managing development over time,
maintaining infrastructure and public spaces,
generating and reinvesting revenue, and
ensuring that the project continues to deliver on
its guiding objectives.
32 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Long-term Governance and
Stewardship
In Phase 4, the governance structure
established in earlier phases transitions into
a long-term stewardship role. The governing
entity—whether a development authority or
similar structure—takes on primary
responsibility for managing the district as an
integrated system.
Core responsibilities include:
• Overseeing ongoing development and
future phases of construction
• Managing property, leases, and
development agreements
• Coordinating operations across
infrastructure, public realm, and private
development
• Monitoring performance and ensuring
compliance with established standards
and commitments
At the same time, the City continues to play a
critical role in:
• Maintaining ownership of underlying
assets and long-term policy authority
• Overseeing major off-site infrastructure
systems
• Ensuring accountability and alignment
with public objectives
Operations/Maintenance
and District Management
A central focus of Phase 4 is the
establishment of a sustainable approach to
operations and maintenance (O&M). This
includes not only physical infrastructure, but
also the management of public spaces and
overall district performance.
Key considerations include:
• Maintenance of internal streets, utilities,
and shared infrastructure
• Management and programming of parks,
plazas, and civic spaces
• Coordination of mobility systems,
including parking and circulation
• Ensuring that operations support both
residents and visitors while minimizing
impacts on surrounding neighborhoods
These functions should be fully integrated
rather than fragmented across multiple
entities to ensure efficiency and a consistent
user experience.
Financial Sustainability and
Revenue Management
Phase 4 is also where the project’s financial
model is fully realized. The district should be
structured to operate without reliance on the
City’s general fund, with revenues generated
through development and ongoing operations
supporting long-term needs.
Potential revenue sources may include:
• Ground leases and property-related
revenues
• Parking and mobility-related fees
• Special assessments or district-based
financing mechanisms
• Programmatic and event-related
revenues
These revenues should be structured to:
• First support operations and
maintenance
• Fund reinvestment in infrastructure and
public space
• Support ongoing community benefits
and programmatic initiatives
• Generate surplus value that can be
returned to the City over time
Successful examples of similar projects have
demonstrated the potential for substantial
long-term value generation when these
systems are properly structured.
33 Reconnecting Pasadena | Pasadena, California
Sustained Development and
Market Responsiveness
Development within the district will continue
over years, requiring an approach that remains
responsive to changing market conditions,
technologies, and community needs.
It will be important to:
• Maintain flexibility in land use and
development strategies within the
established framework
• Sequence future phases to align with
infrastructure capacity and demand
• Periodically reassess development
priorities and opportunities
Rather than attempting to fully define the end
state in advance, the City and governing
entity should allow the district to evolve over
time, guided by the principles and structures
established in earlier phases.
Continued Implementation
of Community Benefits and
Restorative Justice
This is when community benefits and
restorative justice commitments are
sustained and evaluated over the long term.
These efforts must remain active and visible
beyond initial implementation.
This includes:
• Ongoing workforce development and
employment pathways
• Continued support for local and
underrepresented businesses
• Management of community benefit
agreements and revenue-sharing
mechanisms
• Regular evaluation and reporting on
outcomes
The Community Advisory Group (or similar
body), through representation on the
development authority, should continue to play
a role in monitoring progress and ensuring
that commitments are upheld over time.
KEY OUTCOMES
Phase 4 is ongoing by design, but several
defining outcomes characterize a successful
transition into this phase:
• A financially self-sustaining district, with
revenues supporting operations,
maintenance, and reinvestment
• Continued phased development,
responding to market conditions and
evolving community needs
• Fully operational public spaces,
infrastructure, and mobility systems that
serve both the district and surrounding
neighborhoods
• Active programming and activation of
civic and open spaces, contributing to
identity and vitality
• Sustained implementation of community
benefits and restorative justice
commitments
These outcomes reflect the project’s shift
from delivery to long-term performance and
value creation.
34 Montefiore Einstein Health System: Envisioning a Transit-connected Campus in the Bronx, New York Conclusion
The Road Ahead
The Reconnecting Pasadena initiative stands
at a threshold. Years of work—reclaiming the
land, studying its possibilities, listening to the
community, and shaping a vision—have
brought the City to this moment. The outline
of what the site could become is now visible.
What remains is the work of making it real.
The panel’s guidance is intended to help the
City step across that threshold. It offers a
path that is both structured and adaptable:
one that begins with clarity of purpose, builds
the capacity to act, and establishes the
systems needed to carry the project forward
over time. It recognizes that the most
important decisions ahead are not only about
design, but about how to organize effort,
align partners, and sustain momentum
through the long arc of implementation.
What comes next will unfold in stages: early
groundwork, formal entitlements, initial
investments, and, over time, the gradual
emergence of a new district.
The most important work happens now,
laying foundations with the discipline,
coordination, and steady commitment to the
principles that have guided the project so far.
The story of this swath of Pasadena has long
been defined by interruption. But each new
chapter will increasingly be defined by
opportunity, healing, and connection. With
hope, generations to come will tell this story
with pride, as a national model for urban
transformation and restorative justice.
About the Panel
Richard
Bruckner
Panel Chair
Urban Planning
Bruckner is a senior land
use specialist at Mayer
Brown LLP , where he
advises developers and investors on complex
land use entitlements, CEQA compliance, and
public-sector approvals for major real estate
projects. He brings extensive public-sector
leadership experience, having served as
director of the Los Angeles County Department
of Regional Planning (2010–2017), overseeing
planning and regulatory functions for more
than 1 million residents. Previously, he was
director of planning and development for the
City of Pasadena, where he managed citywide
planning, economic development, and multiple
redevelopment areas. Earlier roles include
senior positions with the City of Anaheim and
the Community Redevelopment Agency.
Bruckner holds a BA from Hartwick College
in Oneonta, New York, and a master’s in city
and regional planning from the Ohio State
University. He serves on advisory boards for
ULI Los Angeles and the USC Lusk Center
for Real Estate.
Ava Bromberg
Real Estate
Bromberg is founder
and CEO of Creative
Urban Solutions, Inc.,
a strategic advisory
and development firm
established in 2010. With more than 20
years of experience, she advises public
agencies, institutions, and private clients on
large-scale real estate initiatives. Current
projects include Stanford University's
StanfordNext, LA Metro’s Union Station, and
the Los Angeles County Land Bank Pilot
for Affordable Housing. Previously, she led
community and development strategy for
Downtown West, Google’s 80-acre mixed-use
project in San José, delivering a major mixed-
use entitlement including housing, office,
and public space, along with an innovative
community benefits framework. Earlier, she
developed large-scale creative and mixed-use
projects in Los Angeles.
Bromberg holds a master’s in urban planning
from UCLA, where she is also a PhD
candidate, and a BA from Hamilton College
in Clinton, New York. She is a senior fellow at
the USC Annenberg Innovation Lab.
Joshua Foster
Impact Strategy
Foster is founder
and CEO of JAF, a
consulting firm focused
on community impact
at the intersection
of strategy, design, and development. He
brings a multidisciplinary background as
an architectural designer, educator, and
community strategist, with experience
advancing equity-centered development
initiatives. Foster also serves as an adjunct
professor of architecture at Long Beach City
College and El Camino College in Torrance,
and is active in professional organizations
including the National Organization of Minority
Architects and the Association of Collegiate
Schools of Architecture. His work emphasizes
stakeholder engagement and community-
driven design in complex urban environments,
often in collaboration with public agencies and
development teams.
A Philadelphia native and former New
Yorker, Foster holds degrees in architecture,
sustainability, and real estate development
from Columbia University and the University of
Southern California.
Kacy Keys
Development
Keys is founder of Praxis
Development Group,
launched in 2019 with a
focus on mission-driven
urban development.
She brings more than 25 years of experience
across law, public policy, and real estate
development, with over $1 billion in completed
development across residential, retail, office,
and mixed-use sectors. Keys previously served
as senior vice president at Seritage Growth
Properties and as head of development and
general counsel at JH Snyder, where she led
large-scale entitlement and development
efforts. Her work emphasizes urban infill,
community impact, and navigating complex
regulatory environments.
With deep family roots in Los Angeles, Keys
holds a bachelor’s in economics and a JD
from UC Berkeley and a master’s in urban
planning from UCLA.
Shmel Graham
Legal
Graham is counsel
at Ashurst, where
she advises on land
use, real estate, and
infrastructure-related
matters. With experience in both public
and private sectors, she has represented
developers on entitlements and permitting
while also leading major public initiatives
for the City of Los Angeles. Graham
previously served as director of the mayor’s
operations innovation team under Mayor Eric
Garcetti, where she led complex technology
infrastructure and public safety projects,
including procurement and negotiation of
multi-million-dollar contracts. Her background
includes roles in real estate asset reform and
public safety operations.
She holds a bachelor’s from the University of
Michigan and a JD from Indiana University’s
Robert H. McKinney School of Law, and has
completed leadership programs including
REAP and LAAAWPPI. She is an LA native.
John Keisler
Funding
Keisler is CEO and
managing partner of
Sunstone Investment
Group, Inc., and CEO of
Sunstone Cities, LLC,
where he focuses on aligning investment
strategies with economic development
outcomes. He brings more than 20 years of
public-sector leadership, including serving
as economic development director for the
City of Long Beach, where he led initiatives
that expanded private investment and
advanced key regional sectors such as goods
movement and advanced manufacturing. His
work integrates public policy, finance, and
community development.
He holds a bachelor’s from St. Olaf College
in Northfield, Minnesota, and a master of
public administration from the University of
Southern California. He began his career with
AmeriCorps and Teach for America. He is a
longtime resident of Long Beach.
Lisa Trifiletti
Planning
Trifiletti is founder of
Trifiletti Consulting,
launched in 2016
to provide strategic
planning, entitlement,
and environmental advisory services for
complex infrastructure and development
projects. With more than 20 years of
experience, she is known for leading large,
multi-jurisdictional efforts. Previously, she held
senior leadership roles at Los Angeles World
Airports, including deputy executive director of
environmental programs, where she oversaw
planning and environmental approvals for
major capital projects such as the LAX
Landside Access Modernization Program.
She has since led major initiatives including
the Inglewood Transit Connector and advises
agencies such as LA Metro and Los Angeles
County. Her work emphasizes coordination,
regulatory strategy, and delivery of complex,
large-scale public infrastructure projects.
She holds a BA from Boston College, a
master’s from the Harvard Graduate School of
Education, and JD from Loyola Law School in
Los Angeles.
Jakub Rozga
Design & Development
Rozga is senior vice
president of design
and construction at
Eldridge Acre Partners,
where he oversees real
estate investments across major US markets.
With nearly three decades of experience
spanning private equity, development, and
general contracting, he brings cradle-to-grave
expertise across acquisitions, underwriting,
design, permitting, and construction.
Rozga has led projects across multifamily,
office, hospitality, and industrial sectors,
with a strong track record in complex deal
structuring, budgeting, and execution. His
experience includes direct coordination with
public agencies and utilities across Southern
California, supporting infrastructure delivery
and entitlement processes. Prior to Eldridge,
he held roles with Cityview, Trumark Urban,
Dalian Wanda, and leading contractors
including Webcor Builders and Pankow.
He holds a bachelor’s in civil engineering and
a master’s in construction management from
Cornell University.
Judith Taylor
Impact Strategy
Taylor is a partner at
HR&A Advisors in Los
Angeles, with more than
20 years of experience
in real estate, land use,
and inclusive economic development. Her
work focuses on aligning financial feasibility
with community priorities, particularly through
transit-oriented development, public-private
partnerships, and equitable growth strategies.
She has advised public-sector clients across
California and nationally on major initiatives,
including development agreements, value
capture, and community benefits frameworks.
Taylor played a key role in community benefits
negotiations for Downtown West, helping
shape a $200 million benefits package and
community-controlled fund. Her work also
includes anti-displacement strategies and
policy toolkits for transit corridors and under-
resourced communities.
She holds a bachelor’s in economics from
Stanford University and a master of public
policy and urban planning from the Harvard
Kennedy School.
© 2026 by the Urban Land Institute
2001 L Street, NW | Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036-4948
All rights reserved. Reproduction or use of the
whole or any part of the contents without written
permission of the copyright holder is prohibited.