City commission OKs overhaul of riverfront zoning guidelines

Some developers oppose new plan

The Pittsburgh planning commission approved a massive overhaul of the city’s riverfront zoning Tuesday, but not before shooting down changes designed to accommodate a major North Side development.

In a 6-0 vote, commission members endorsed a controversial plan that involves 35 miles of riverfront and could affect how development is done in neighborhoods like Lawrenceville, the Strip District, the North Side and the South Side for years to come.

Their recommendation now goes before city council for a vote. The plan has drawn the ire of some of the city’s largest developers while winning the support of many of its riverfront advocates.

The commission adopted a

series of revisions Tuesday designed to blunt some of the criticism. One exempted Heinz Field and PNC Park from a 500-foot limitation on building length on the North Shore after complaints from a lawyer for the Steelers and Pirates.

But one that didn’t make the cut would have raised the allowable maximum building height in a section of Chateau bordered by the West End Bridge and West North Avenue from 150 feet to 250 feet.

The change was proposed at the urging of Millcraft Investments, which is planning a major mixed use development at the former J. Allan Steel site that involves taller, slender buildings as well as amenities such as a giant Ferris wheel.

But, in leading the charge against that amendment, commission member Sabina Deitrick said it seemed like a “backdoor variance” designed specifically for the Millcraft project.

“This just seems to me to be too company- and sitespecific to be part of the general riverfront zoning,” she said.

Another member, Dina Blackwell, worried that the taller buildings could block views from other parts of Chateau and the North Side and affect the look of the riverfront.

Afterward, Chad Wheatley, Millcraft’s vice president of construction, said it was too soon to tell how the amendment’s rejection would affect the developer’s plans. One option would be to lobby city council to reinsert the provision rejected by the commission.

“We’ll regroup and figure out the solution,” he said. “There’s always an alternative plan.”

At a hearing two weeks ago, Oxford Development Company, one of the region’s largest developers, also had complained about the proposed riverfront zoning districts.

A company rep stated then that a proposed $300 million mixed-use development dubbed 3 Crossings 2.0 in the Strip would not be permitted under the new rules and that its flourishing 3 Crossings development, home to office buildings with tenants like Apple and apartments, would not have been feasible, either.

But after Tuesday’s vote, Steve Guy, Oxford president and chief executive officer, said that with some of the changes, the commission had “made a lot of progress” in addressing concerns.

“I think they paid attention to a lot of points that a lot of people made. We’ll keep talking,” he said.

Mr. Guy liked some of the changes made to setback requirements. But he wanted more clarification on a bonus system included in the new zoning that would allow developers to build taller or closer to the river if they met city goals involving matters such as affordable housing and stormwater management.

“Change is always hard. It’s inevitable. We just have to work together and try to make it the best change possible,” Mr. Guy said.

One encouraging sign, Oxford officials said, is that the city is allowing a sharing of bonus points for overlapping developments in the same area.

Mr. Guy said part of the 3 Crossings 2.0 project would include a mix of workforce and affordable housing to supplement commercial space.

“We’re going to try to do the most mid-market project we can,” he said.

Vivien Li, president and CEO of Riverlife, which largely supported the new zoning regulations, said she had some concerns about a change in riverfront setbacks made Tuesday but was still optimistic about achieving a good plan for the riverfronts.

“It’s always a compromise. It is for the development community. It is for the environmental community. We’re very optimistic we’ll be coming together to city council,” she said.