Pittsburgh City Council OKs controversial $6 million master plan

Pittsburgh City Council on Tuesday approved a controversial proposal to spend about $6 million for a citywide master plan, overriding some members’ strenuous objections.

Opponents raised alarms about the steep price tag and the lack of a clear implementation strategy. Supporters touted the plan as a blueprint for future budget prioritization, zoning changes and better collaboration among various city departments.

Members debated the proposal for months ahead of Tuesday’s final vote.

Council authorized the city to contract with two national consultants to spearhead the comprehensive plan, which Mayor Ed Gainey has said will guide the city for the next 25 years.

A two-year, $2.6 million contract with Pittsburgh-based Common Cause Consultants will cover the community engagement portion of the project. That contract passed 5-3 with one abstention.

A separate $3.2 million contract with HR&A Advisors — which has offices in New York, Atlanta, Dallas, Los Angeles, Raleigh and Washington DC — will cover the plan’s technical elements. Council approved it 6-3.

A memo from the Department of City Planning attached to the legislation said the city can use the plan to guide allocations of capital investments, optimize usage of city-owned land and inform decision-making during the financial challenges the city is expected to experience in the coming years.

Councilwoman Erika Strassburger, D-Squirrel Hill, said the plan could be particularly helpful “to help us inform the budget” in a “time of necessary austerity.”

Other council members, however, questioned the wisdom in spending so much money on the plan when there are other things the city needs to budget for.

Councilman Anthony Coghill, D-Beechview, called it “financially irresponsible” and voiced concerns that the city would spend millions on a plan that may never actually be implemented.

The money being spent on the citywide plan could also cover the cost of four ladder trucks for the city’s bureau of fire or 15 garbage or recycling trucks, based on costs outlined in the city’s 2024 budget.

Councilman Bob Charland, D-South Side, voted in favor but first expressed concerns that parts of the plan might be “unimplementable” and some residents could still feel left out of the process even after the city spends millions on a community engagement consultant.

Officials in the city’s Department of Planning pointed to other cities that have launched similar comprehensive plans, and said those blueprints have helped them to rezone neighborhoods to bolster affordable housing, reprioritize capital investments and leverage grant funding.

Councilwoman Deb Gross, D-Highland Park, however, has noted that other cities have often paid far less for their master plans. In Pittsburgh, the plan will cost about $20 per city resident. Chicago spent about $1.30 per capita on a similar effort, she said.

Planning officials responded to such concerns in a memo by arguing that other cities have paid less because they’ve updated existing plans. They claimed Pittsburgh has never had a comprehensive plan before, though some officials have said otherwise.

The memo also touted an “expansive public engagement process” that will reach out to people with disabilities, non-English speakers and other “hard to reach communities” — efforts planning officials said are beyond what was covered by some other cities.

Coghill, Gross and Councilwoman Theresa Kail-Smith voted against both measures.

Councilman Khari Mosley, D-Point Breeze, supported the contract with HR&A Advisors but abstained from voting on the contract with Common Cause Consultants because of his ties to 1Hood Media, a subcontractor on the deal.

Strassburger and Charland joined council members Barb Warwick, Bobby Wilson and R. Daniel Lavelle in supporting the measures.

Related:

• Pittsburgh council splits over Gainey's $6M master plan proposal