University Times

In a preliminary tally, Pittsburgh City Council voted 9-0 yesterday in favor of the University's request for a conditional use exemption to the Pittsburgh Housing Code. Pitt is seeking permission to construct three 4-story apartment buildings for undergraduate student housing where Sennott Street joins Oakland Avenue and South Bouquet Street. The final city council vote will be held Sept. 22, the last hurdle in the approval process, barring unexpected appeals.

Pitt is seeking approval of phase 1 of a plan to increase undergraduate student housing on the University-owned property by 192 beds in time for next fall's classes. The University hopes eventually to house about 800 undergraduates in the Oakland Avenue-South Bouquet Street complex. Pending future approvals, plans are to build 325 more units for fall 2000 on the site and to increase the total to some 800 beds for fall 2001.

For the phase 1 construction, Pitt previously had secured approval from both the Department of City Planning and the Zoning Board of Pittsburgh, contingent on city council's okay. A two and a half hour public hearing held Sept. 10 in city council chambers drew mostly endorsements for the project.

The session began with Eloise Hirsh, director of the Department of City Planning, who summarized the planning com-mission's report, which had been submitted to council. "The process has been controversial," Hirsh said. "It's been hard for both sides to hear each other even when the goal is the same," she said, referring to Pitt and some Oakland community organizations. "So we've seen communication gaps. But both sides agreed that the highest priority was a commitment to providing more housing for Pitt students." Jerome Cochran, Pitt's assistant chancellor, pitched the University's proposal in the context of the plan's evolution over the last four years, going back to the 1995 master plan formulated under former Chancellor J. Dennis O'Connor.

"In early '95, the University submitted its master plan, which was approved with conditions. But by summer of 1995, then interim Chancellor Mark Nordenberg asked for an in-house comprehensive facilities evaluation and formed a committee chaired by Provost [James] Maher.

"What this committee did was provide a comprehensive, make-sense plan so that the state could target capital projects — for example, the $38 million [approved by the state] for the convocation center — pursuant to the University's priorities," Cochran said.

The University issued a revised plan in 1997 and a companion document, University of Pittsburgh Comprehensive Housing Strategy, this past June.

"Now, to be honest, housing [in the 1997 plan] was targeted as a mid-term project, meaning five or so years within a ten-year plan. But with community organization-based dialogue, [student housing] was moved to a short-term project," Cochran said.

"We heard the desire for undergraduate housing and utilizing property that the University already had [for that]. This, for one thing, would put pressure on Oakland landlords to upkeep their property.

"It was determined that this [the South Bouquet-Oakland Avenue property] was the most desirable location," Cochran added.

"We also know that today's students just don't want old-style dormitories; they want to be adults; they don't want to be sharing gang showers and they want their own kitchens and bedrooms and so forth.

"I do recognize a level of dissatisfaction with the University; I understand it. Nevertheless, the University is most interested in the community. We sat down with community groups. For each and every new project we'll go through the hoops, we'll meet and listen to what residents want," Cochran said.

In general, council members were receptive to Cochran's presentation and his answers to council members' questions regarding police presence in the area, parking availability and the qualifications of students to be housed in the new buildings. Pitt plans to house only returning students who have been screened regarding their academic record and behavior, Cochran said. Councilman Jim Ferlo was not necessarily satisfied on one issue, however. In an exchange with Cochran, Ferlo wanted more assurance that the parking needs of students to be housed in the new complex would be accommodated. In an agreement between the city and Pitt, Cochran said, students housed in the new dorms will not be eligible for neighborhood parking permits.

Cochran also said that the University is not increasing its student population, but housing a number of students who otherwise would be living in Oakland or nearby areas. "We've found that about one in seven undergraduates have parking needs. That number won't change. And we're adding 480 parking spaces to our inventory, 350 in the Towers View lot and 130 on the South Side," he said. (Commuters from the South Side lot can ride free-of-charge via Port Authority buses.) At yesterday's city council meeting, an amendment was added to the proposal that as a condition of approval Pitt students would not be eligible for residential parking permits. At the Sept. 10 council hearing, eight speakers endorsed the conditional use proposal.

James Holland, former president of the University Senate, spoke as an Oakland resident. "I've lived on Atwood Street for 19 years," Holland said. "I must say that I am a Pitt professor, but don't think I speak for the Pitt administration. As a resident, I like quality in my neighborhood. On issues such as trash, parking, student behavior, graffiti, the record of the University is excellent." Bruce McGough, a Pitt alumnus, argued that high-quality housing attracts students. Peter Levenis, an Oakland restaurateur, and Mike Chizmar, who represents some 70 area businesses as president of the Oakland Business and Civic Association, maintained that housing more students on or near campus can only be good for commercial Oakland.

The strongest opposition came from Cappy Ascheim, a resident of East Liberty, who maintained that the University was vague about the tax status of these and other University construction projects. Ascheim allowed that the council hearing was not the place to argue tax status, but said that was "the real issue." He also argued that "a hearing of this kind should not be held on a weekday at 10 in the morning, Downtown, when it's difficult for working people to attend. It should be held in the neighborhood." Pitt plans to break ground at the site by the end of this month and complete it by late August 1999. The cost of the first phase is expected to be $5.3 million.

–Peter Hart