The Pittsburgh City Council voted Tuesday to shelve a program that allowed homeowners to buy neighboring vacant lots at deep discounts.

The Side Yard Sale program had previously allowed people to buy adjacent city-owned lots for about $200. Their goal was to get vacant lots out of the city system and back onto the tax rolls, while allowing residents to purchase green space and gardens.

This August, Councilwoman Deb Gross sponsored legislation that would have only offered the bargain price to people who actually live next to the lot. She sought the change to prevent out-of-state homeowners and absentee landlords from getting the discount.

That bill was stalled for weeks, and after debate and discussion, Gross decided to pause the program while it is reconsidered.

The council voted 6-3 Tuesday to give final approval to slam the brakes. Councilors Anthony Coghill, Theresa Kail Smith and Bob Charland voted against.

When Gross initially introduced the original bill, he said that as the real estate market has heated up in Pittsburgh, speculators have become more aggressive in purchasing property in the city. She reiterated that concern Tuesday.

“For outside corporate real estate investment trusts or private equity from other cities to have this back door into cheap urban properties where they’re not actually creating a community garden or anything like that, that was a bigger problem, which (we) needed to “Make sure we stop the program when we realize that,” he said.

Today’s real estate market is different than decades ago, when the side yard program began, he said. There are now more ways for the city to address vacant lots, including through the Land Bank, treasury sales and an “Adopt-a-Lot” program, where people can rent lots from the city.

“I think it’s a really good time to look at what types of opportunities and who is taking advantage of different types of programs and how they fit together,” Gross said.

Gross wants to see a reexamination of the state of vacant lots, including a look at how many homeowners actually live next to a city-owned vacant lot. Because the program was specifically intended for side yards, he said he wants to reevaluate how much green space has been created through the program and where it is located.

“Are city-owned lots near places that need more green space? Or does the city own property in places where we need more housing? she said. “These are all open questions to which we don’t yet know the answers.”

Not all councilors were in favor of stopping the program. Coghill said he would prefer to see this continue, especially because it reduces the workload for the Department of Public Works, which must maintain the lots. He also noted that he was against the original bill because he felt it would have discriminated against landlords.

“I wonder, why are we altering this?” said. “This has proven to be a successful program, at least in my district. Many people have taken advantage of it. …I think the best thing to do is keep it the way it is.”

He suggested increasing program fees to generate more revenue for the city.

Councilman Bobby Wilson, who voted yes on the proposal, expressed doubt about how many outside developers were using the program. But he agreed it needed an overhaul, especially as the Council considers proposed zoning changes in the coming months.

A parcel sold through the side yard program comes with deed restrictions that prevent the buyer from constructing a new building on that property: buyers are limited to making non-structural improvements, such as creating a garden, green space, pool or a terrace.

But one of the upcoming zoning proposals the Council will consider soon allows new homes to be built on smaller lots than previously allowed. Some vacant lots could now be candidates for construction when they weren’t before, Wilson said.

“We don’t really understand if these side lots are buildable or not. So we really need to work with probably an outside company to do the analysis,” Wilson said. As president of the land bank, he hopes it can address many of the properties in the future.

There are currently about 10 garage sale applications in the system and they will still be processed, Gross said. The bill prevents further applications from being accepted.