The Pittsburgh City Council is preparing to debate housing development in the community

The Pittsburgh City Council is preparing for what could be a lengthy, bitter debate over proposed zoning legislation.

Two conflicting bills will be presented to the council in the coming months. One of them was put forward by Mayor Ed Gainey’s administration and clarifies the definitions surrounding congregate living arrangements such as group homes and nursing homes. It also streamlines the process for approving smaller group homes. This is intended to ensure that the city complies with the federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988.

According to Deputy Mayor Jake Pawlak, the bill includes homeless shelters, homes for the disabled and nursing homes. This would move smaller versions of these homes with up to 10 people from a staff-level inspection to a statutory approval, reducing administrative hurdles. The degree of rationalization depends on the size and capacity of the houses in question.

“I think our goal is to level the playing field in as simple a process as necessary to increase the number of housing options for people who need supportive housing,” Pawlak said, describing the change as an attempt to “remove unnecessary barriers.” to eliminate”. supportive housing of all kinds.”

An alternative proposal put forth by Councilwoman Theresa Kail-Smith offers the City Council and Planning Commission more opportunities to get involved by modifying community housing to require conditional use. It would require small group homes and nursing homes to be subject to mandatory public hearings before the Planning Commission and Council. The council would be required to ultimately approve the uses.

At an Oct. 1 meeting, Kail-Smith said she wanted to ensure “council’s voice is not downplayed in this process.”

“We want places where children and people who have to live in institutions or temporary accommodation are safe,” she said on Tuesday. “We need to make sure the resources are going to the people and that they are well managed.” These things don’t just affect people outside the facility. They impact the people being treated at the facility.”

Kail-Smith’s bill was technically introduced earlier and must be addressed before the administration’s bill can be considered by the council. Their bill was scheduled to go before the Planning Commission on Tuesday, but was held up for four weeks.

Pawlak said he is “optimistic” that the council, administration and planning commission can “find a path that everyone can agree on.”

Letter sparks discussion

A letter Kail-Smith sent about the upcoming legislation caused a stir among some city residents

In the Oct. 2 letter, sent to District 2 property owners and later shared online by residents, Kail-Smith claims the mayor’s legislation would allow group homes for up to 10 people in each building or permit city planning , to authorize a change to a school or nursing home into a “large homeless shelter” without community notice or public process.

She also said the bill would allow city planning to approve large homeless shelters and “waive any zoning regulations it deems necessary” to allow group homes or homeless shelters to operate anywhere in Pittsburgh.

At Tuesday’s council meeting, Smith said she sent the letter to her constituents to raise awareness of the legislation she is introducing. She said she wanted to help struggling Pittsburghers but stressed her concerns about poorly run or dangerous facilities.

“The result actually surprised me because I myself was getting calls from all over the city,” she said. “But this is so important to the city of Pittsburgh that we get it right.”

In a statement, Gainey spokeswoman Olga George criticized the letter’s claims and Kail-Smith’s legislation, clarifying that the bill would remove barriers to switching “between a group placement or institutional use and another group placement use.”

“Councilmember Kail-Smith’s proposed bill does nothing to address these issues, but instead increases the bureaucratic burden, cost and length of the process associated with this type of change,” she said.

George said the government’s bill would make it clear that 10 disabled people could be allowed to live in a typical residential setting and that these types of small group residential homes would need to be properly licensed. Kail-Smith’s bill “would make housing more than eight disabled people a conditional use, making that process significantly more time and costly, without eliminating the confusion and redundancy of using group housing.”

Councilman Dan Lavelle said at the meeting that his office had received calls about the letter as recently as Tuesday morning. Councilman Anthony Coghill said his official had been “inundated” with phone calls about the bill and said it had “obviously touched a nerve” with many people. He said he supported Kail-Smith in sending the letter.

“I look forward to discussions with the Planning Commission to move this in the right direction,” Coghill said.

Councilwoman Deb Gross said her office has only received one email, although she has heard conversations about the letter online. She said she expects debate to move forward on both the mayor’s bill and Kail-Smith’s bills.

“We need to have a discussion about what each bill means, and we will have that debate,” she said, noting that it is too premature to discuss the mayor’s bill in depth because it has not technically come before the council yet be.