City Council hears hours of testimony on Bill 15‑45: citywide inclusionary zoning, ADUs and parking reform

PITTSBURGH — City Planning staff on Thursday presented Bill 15‑45, a sweeping set of amendments to Title 9 of the Pittsburgh Code that would expand inclusionary zoning citywide, permit accessory dwelling units (ADUs) across residential areas and remove minimum off‑street parking requirements, and publicly took questions during a four‑hour public hearing. Planning staff said the package also includes development bonuses tied to the city’s performance point system and changes to definitions, measurements and review procedures.

Planning officials told council the changes grew from years of housing studies and neighborhood engagement. “The series of amendments is around the introduction of legislation around accessory dwelling units, changes to our parking standards … inclusionary zoning and an expansion of the inclusionary zoning citywide,” said Andrew Dash, deputy director of the Department of City Planning. Zoning administrator Corey Lehman walked through technical standards for ADUs, noting they would be permitted “by right” in many cases and would not require owner occupancy.

Supporters and opponents gave sharply divergent views during the public comment period about whether the package — particularly the proposed citywide inclusionary zoning (IZ) mandate — will expand affordable housing or discourage new construction. Advocates said IZ is a necessary tool to produce mixed‑income housing in neighborhoods with transit and services; opponents, including many developers and construction trade representatives, argued the IZ mandate is an unfunded cost that will make some projects financially infeasible and could reduce overall housing production.

Why it matters

If adopted, the amendments would change how the city regulates housing supply in corridors with high development pressure and across lower‑growth neighborhoods. Planning staff and supporters say inclusionary zoning can create permanently or long‑term restricted affordable units in neighborhoods with jobs and transit access; opponents say a mandatory citywide requirement risks shifting costs onto renters or driving development to suburban markets or to…