Pittsburgh City Council is ready to reconsider making some types of homeless housing more feasible – and its sponsors hope to allow the measure to be considered independently of more controversial zoning changes.
A bill proposed Tuesday sets rules to allow “interim housing” – facilities that house homeless people and facilitate transition to more permanent housing, in certain zoning areas. The accommodations could include scratch-built “tiny homes,” or conversions of empty apartment buildings or other buildings in high-density areas. The homes would be limited to operating for four years at maximum.
The bill’s sponsors, council members Anthony Coghill and Deb Gross, proposed similar legislation last year, but the idea languished amid concerns voiced by the city’s planning department
The idea was later folded into a broader bill proposed by Mayor Ed Gainey, which includes a number of provisions that have become contentious in themselves – a fact that prompted Coghill and Gross to reintroduce their language as a standalone bill.
“The way they lumped these amendments together, it can be problematic. And I don't know when or if that will even come to us,” Coghill said. “So we felt timing was critical. We want the mayor to have these options going into next winter.”
“This is not congregate shelters. This is not cots squeezed together in a church basement where you get kicked out in the morning,” Gross said of the small-scale structures. “This is a place with a door and a lock where you can be safe and where you can live for six months or twelve months, where you have 24-hour care, if you have behavioral health problems, if you have addiction problems, if you have health problems, so that you're ready for your independent living”
Because existing shelters are crowded, many homeless people are stuck outside waiting for a bed opening, Gross said. She hopes that building more interim housing would help clear a backlog in providing homeless services.
“If we have just a couple more of these buildings, we’ll be helping people move into independent living,” she said. “Then we'll have room in the shelters. Then we won't have as many people outside.”
Gross and Coghill’s measure is slated for discussion next week. In the meantime, a public hearing set for Wednesday evening will likely stir up a broader debate.
Gainey’s bill, which includes measures to streamline the process for approving smaller group homes, is at odds with an alternate proposal by Councilor Theresa Kail-Smith. The measures differ over how much input to grant council, planning officials and residents when group housing is proposed for an area. Kail-Smith, whose bill would among other things require mandatory public hearings before such housing is established, has been urging supporters to speak out.
While Gainey’s measure also includes less controversial provisions, Coghill said he’d oppose it – even if it included his own interim housing proposal.
“If I had the choice to vote for what the current package is just to get this bill through, I couldn't vote for it,” said Coghill, who emphasized that the interim housing facilities he and Gross proposed would have to be approved through a public process.
In a statement, Gainey spokesperson Olga George said Gross and Coghill’s bill matches the language in Gainey’s measure – language she said “was developed to address the needs of housing for the homelessness in the context of a comprehensive reform of the way that the zoning code handles supportive housing for numerous populations.
“City Council members can pull a portion of the bill if that’s what they believe needs to be done,” George added. “However, we hope that they will pass the [Gainey] bill as a whole and not piecemeal.”
No matter what the process, homeless residents are unlikely to see an impact any time soon.
If approved next Wednesday, the interim housing bill will head to the planning commission, Coghill said. The commission’s review could not begin until next year, meaning the changes won’t take effect until the winter of 2025.
