Pittsburgh Planning Commission delays vote on controversial plan to help homeless

Pittsburgh’s Planning Commission on Tuesday delayed its vote on a controversial zoning change meant to address homelessness, even as commissioners and other officials agreed it’s an urgent issue in need of immediate attention.

The measure — sponsored by City Council members Anthony Coghill, D-Beechview, and Deb Gross, D-Highland Park — would permit regulated homeless camps with bathrooms, support services, garbage pickup and other amenities. They’ve even proposed upgrading tents to tiny houses with locking doors and electricity.

Though officials agree that the city needs to take action to help its homeless population, they’ve been divided about this proposal.

Mayor Ed Gainey’s administration and some members of the Planning Commission have voiced concerns the legislation would bring unintended consequences and be difficult to implement.

They’ve questioned whether creating some regulated homeless sites would force the city to clear all of the other camps in the city — a concern City Council’s solicitor and others have said is unwarranted.

Some members of the public at Tuesday’s meeting also raised alarms that regulated locations would attract more homeless people to the city’s Downtown area or hurt nearby businesses.

“We feel the proposed change will undo the millions of dollars of investments in the city’s riverfronts,” said Tom Zinn, president of the Allegheny West Civic Council, arguing that bringing homeless populations to the areas pinpointed in the legislation, including Downtown and along the city’s rivers, could drive people away from those spots.

Proponents have touted the idea of designating Downtown areas with amenities for homeless people as a way to provide quick, cost-effective, safer and more dignified shelter to people who currently live in tent camps.

To demonstrate the practicality of a small village of tiny houses, Coghill built a prototype, an effort that he said took him two days and about $1,800.

“This is just one stopgap solution that has the potential in the short term to save lives,” said Rachel Nunes, director of the Thomas Merton Center.

Jonathan Nadle, of Beechview, told commissioners he thought the tiny home plan seemed like a cost-effective solution that could be implemented far faster than building more shelters or waiting for more housing.

“Those who oppose this plan haven’t presented viable alternatives,” he said.

Members of the Planning Commission said they would join other city staff in working with Coghill and Gross to work through challenges and potential compromises during the eight-week hold before the measure comes back to the table.

Commissioner Rachel O’Neill — who had previously voiced concerns about potential legal challenges to the measure — on Tuesday acknowledged homelessness is an “urgent problem” and there’s not time to wait for a perfect, comprehensive plan when short-term fixes could benefit people in the near future.

“I don’t want the perfect to be the enemy of the good,” she said. “I want to see this move forward.”

Officials in Gainey’s office have also said they plan to present potential solutions in the coming days.

The council members spearheading the effort have said they’re open to working with commissioners and other officials to make changes to the legislation.

Coghill and Gross have proposed a number of potential solutions to address homelessness and reiterated that the city should be exploring multiple types of housing and shelter that could work together to address homelessness.

The measure will return to the Planning Commission in eight weeks. After that, it will go to City Council for a final vote.

A spokesperson for Gainey declined to say whether the mayor would sign the legislation if council approved it.

Related:

• Pittsburgh commission to vote on controversial plan addressing homelessness

• Pittsburgh leaders push for more transitional housing to address homelessness