ShareThis Page
Veterans Place moving forward with Penn Hills tiny homes development |
Penn Hills

Veterans Place moving forward with Penn Hills tiny homes development

| Wednesday, December 12, 2018 4:06 p.m
A rendering of the ‘tiny homes project’ for homeless veterans planned along Jefferson Road in Penn Hills.

After legal battles dating back to May, an organization aiming to build a tiny homes community for homeless military veterans can proceed with plans but could face another appeal.

Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Joseph James said in a Dec. 5 court filing the Penn Hills Zoning Hearing Board properly granted a use variance to Veterans Place of Washington Boulevard to build a community center as part of its tiny homes community along Jefferson Road.

Veterans Place of Washington Boulevard in March sought a variance to complement its project — which will feature 15 to 17 homes, a garden, greenhouse, pavilion, walking trails and a stormwater retention pond — with a community center described as a “group care facility.”

Penn Hills Zoning Hearing Board eventually granted the request despite some push back from residents.

Robert Paganico, 71, said the community center might bring large buses and vans, making the residential property more like a commercial property – which he doesn’t want.

“I don’t like it. I never did,” Paganico said. “That (community center) is going to cause all kinds of traffic, bring in a lot of people into a small area. We don’t have the room. There are so many other places in Penn Hills they can go.”

Paganico and his wife, Trona, appealed the municipality’s decision to grant Veterans Place a variance in May. The couple argued the variance was improperly granted because they see the community center as being a commercial building. The property is zoned residential, making a variance necessary.

In court filings, the municipality’s Zoning Hearing Board defended its granting of the variance for the community center by saying construction of typical residential homes on the site was “impractical if not impossible.”

According to the Zoning Hearing Board, the site was a former sewage treatment facility and the property’s fill was not properly compacted. The property also has an underground sewage line running through its center, making the construction of traditional homes with basements impossible.

“But the property can be used for what it’s zoned for, residential. And by Veterans Place’s own admission, the property can be used for residential purposes in accordance with the zoning ordinance — yet the board still granted them a use variance to have a commercial building,” said Anthony Sosso, the Paganico’s attorney.

The lawyer said he believes the case has grounds for an appeal with the Commonwealth court, but he hopes his client and Veterans Place can come to an amicable agreement.

Barring another legal battle, the next step for Veterans Place is to submit the $5 million project’s site plans to the municipality’s Planning Commission for approval, which it plans to do as soon as possible.

“We’re hoping mid- to early-spring to start (construction),” said Marlon Ferguson, executive director of Veterans Place.

Ferguson said he is hopeful the judge’s decision means an end to the legal battle, which has already set back the project by about a year.

“The core of the community center is to provide veterans with additional resources to be sustainable. We’re hoping (the community center) will be the additional resources for the veterans and also for the community,” he said.

He hopes the community center, which could be up to 7,000 square-feet, will include programs on cooking and healthy eating classes, civics, politics and stress management and other topics.

“I firmly believe it’s a win-win for everyone involved,” Ferguson said.

Dillon Carr is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Dillon at 412-871-2325, or via Twitter @dillonswriting.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.