EDITORIAL – South Oakland not up to code

South Oakland has long had a reputation among Pitt students and other residents for being… South Oakland has long had a reputation among Pitt students and other residents for being unruly and dangerous. And it seems that this reputation will soon get much worse. Last week, the city ordered the shutdown of two South Oakland apartment buildings because of fire code violations.

The city’s Bureau of Building Inspection rarely shuts down apartment buildings, but the two buildings on McKee Place had become unlivable. As reported by the Post-Gazette, one of the buildings was cited for gas odors, inadequate smoke detectors, doors with insufficient fire resistance and inoperable windows. While these citations were filed two years ago, the owner failed to take the necessary actions to correct the mistakes.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl told the Post-Gazette, “We’ve taken this unique step to really show that we’re serious about this.”

City codes exist for a reason – to be enforced. Until now, it seems that few people took the codes seriously. Shutting down the apartment buildings sends an important message not just to landlords who fail to take care of building violations but also to students and other Oakland residents who might be afraid to report problems. The Post-Gazette reported that the McKee Place apartments were shut down after two Oakland residents called for the Office of Municipal Investigations to look into city code enforcement in the neighborhood.

But not all residents are quick to report problems. Many students who live in apartments are often willing to bear dangerous living conditions because they know that they will be moving out in just a few months. But in order to make Oakland a better place to live, this has to change. Students should do their part in improving their living situations.

Part of the problem lies with the University. Pitt has a responsibility to play a more active leadership role in encouraging city code enforcement in off-campus areas. The University has much to gain with stronger off-campus housing and should work with the city to make sure the codes are enforced and violations are taken care of.

Furthermore, Pitt should try to be a voice for students so that students may easily report problems. The Student Government Board has done a good job of this with their Off Campus Living survey. Students were able to grade their landlords, and the results were then posted on the SGB Web site for prospective tenants to see.

As it currently stands, more than 15 of the landlords listed received at least one D in the landlord evaluations. More than 40 landlords received at least one D or F in their apartment interior evaluations. And more than 10 landlords received at least one D or F in their apartment exterior evaluations.

Obviously, reporting problems is not always as simple as clicking a mouse. Oftentimes, reporting violations directly to the city can be a difficult process and tenants might have to wait a long time before they see a response. There should be more communication between the students, the University and the city so that the reporting procedure can be made as straightforward as possible.

If serious improvement is to be made, every side – from the landlords to the students to the University – has an obligation to take action in its own way. Just because off-campus housing is not under Pitt’s direct responsibility does not mean it shouldn’t be up to University standards.