Next steps in inclusionary zoning debate delayed at City Council

Pittsburgh residents will have to wait a while longer for City Council to act on a controversial proposal to provide more affordable housing in the city.

Council narrowly voted on Wednesday to delay a public hearing for six weeks on an inclusionary zoning bill proposed by Councilor Bob Charland — and in the process they effectively put a hold on a more expansive measure proposed by Mayor Ed Gainey at least until May.

Not everyone was happy with the delay. “The citizens are owed their city council hearing, so we should move forthwith to have that hearing,” said Councilor Deb Gross, who backs Gainey’s bill.

But Councilor Erika Strassburger, who cast the deciding vote in favor of the delay, expressed a “sincere hope” that it would allow for some consensus to merge on a divisive issue. “We need to talk to one another,” she said. “We need to communicate with the mayor's office. We need to communicate with the public and stakeholders.”

Inclusionary zoning is a rule requiring developers to set aside a certain portion of living units in new buildings to be affordable to people with lower incomes. Gainey and supporters have been pushing a package of bills that includes a mandate to implement inclusionary zoning citywide.

In response, Charland offered up a counter-proposal, which would let each neighborhood decide for itself whether to apply the zoning rules. It also requires the city or its development agencies to pay for additional costs that inclusionary zoning could impose on developers.

Charland’s bill was given a negative recommendation by the city’s Planning Commission back in January, during a heated 11-hour meeting. The bill and the thumbs-down were transmitted to council on February 21, but council members took no further action until Wednesday.

That's when City Council President Dan Lavelle tried to jump-start the discussion, requesting Charland’s bill be brought forward to give the public another chance to weigh the matter.

“We have a lot of hearings to hold, we have a lot of bills coming before us, and I thought it was the appropriate thing to do, which is to now schedule it for the public hearing [so] the community could … express their thoughts on the bill,” Lavelle told WESA.

But Charland urged that the matter be set aside for six weeks, so that he could make changes to his bill. He said he is reviewing other cities’ policies to borrow ideas from them.

“Other cities have found ways to increase their affordable housing supply, and the bill that I've proposed probably could have some tweaks to make it better,” he said to WESA.

But in the same conversation, Charland also took a swipe at the mayor’s plan — and a refrain Gainey has been using to make the case for it. “The bill the mayor has proposed will not build affordable units, regardless of how many times he says ‘Keep Pittsburgh Home,’” Charland said.

Mandatory inclusionary zoning has been in place in the hot real estate market of Lawrenceville since 2019. Today, it’s also in place in Bloomfield, Polish Hill and parts of Oakland.

But over the past several months, the debate over whether to expand it citywide has been one of Pittsburgh City Council’s hottest topics.

Gainey’s approach would make inclusionary zoning the law of the land everywhere in the city. Supporters say that will ensure less-wealthy residents can be included in neighborhoods, avoiding neighborhood segregation. Opponents, including real estate developers, argue a mandatory approach citywide could result in less housing and raise costs, because developers will absorb lost revenue on the affordable units by raising rates on the others.

Charland’s allies on council, Theresa Kail-Smith and Anthony Coghill, all voted, along with Strassburger and Bobby Wilson, to hold off on the measure.

Gross, who supports Gainey’s approach, said there’s a reason for that.

Gainey’s zoning reform plans originated with staff in the City Planning department, and unlike Charland’s bill, received the support of the city planning commission. But Charland introduced his bill directly into council, as is typical for a legislator. Council rules require bills on the same topic to be addressed in chronological order. That means council’s pause on Charland’s bill halts the mayor as well. And with Gainey fighting to keep his seat in the May 20 Democratic primary, such delays can cast a bigger shadow.

“Councilman Charland and now the [council members] who just supported him in a hold have the mayor's package blocked,” Gross said after the meeting. “The Planning Commission has recommended it to City Council to vote to support it. We are unable to do that because of Councilman Charland’s bill, and now the five members who voted today to support him blocking the mayor's package.”

When asked by WESA, Charland denied it was his intention to delay the process past the primary.

“The intent here was to make sure that we had time to have the adequate research,” he told WESA. “I want to have a full discussion about what these policies mean and how we can actually get affordable units out of developers and how we can build a process that will create more affordable units, not less.”

Strassburger said to WESA her own hope was that the bills could be blended in some way, since neither had sufficient support in their current form.

“I think it makes sense that the public have the bill that is most likely going to pass,” she said.