On November 5, 2026, the Pittsburgh Zoning Board of Adjustment heard six cases and issued no decisions from the bench. The longest fight was over a Sheetz convenience store and gas station on Banksville Road, back after a July denial of the 150-foot residential-distance variance. Neighbors and Councilmember Bob Charland asked the Board to keep pressure on a South Side Slopes materials-transfer site whose zoning approval they are protesting. The Board also heard a Goodwill Opportunity Center sign on Brighton Road, a Carrick fence variance, a Central Northside subdivision that would put a unit over a garage, and four hillside townhouses on Guadalupe Place. Five cases closed for written decisions. The protest appeal was continued so the parties can meet with the councilmember’s office. Here’s what happened, by case.
Recording: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHALc0RQDRo
Hearing and Action
Zoning Case 140 of 2026 — 1601 Brighton Road (California-Kirkbride)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Variance from Section 919.03.N.2 for a community-center identification sign: 12 square feet is the maximum; 18 square feet is proposed (BDA-2026-07373). Bill Whitehead of Accel Sign Group presented for Goodwill of Southwestern Pennsylvania. The building at 1601 Brighton Road is the former North Side Common Ministries site, now the Goodwill Opportunity Center. A 2022 certificate of occupancy covers a homeless shelter, dining and kitchen, support and counseling, offices, training, and a food pantry. Whitehead said the proposed wall sign replaces an existing 18-square-foot "North Side Common Ministries" sign with a same-size "Goodwill Opportunity Center" sign under the arched entry on the Brighton Road side, with slightly smaller letter height. Other door placards (weapons policy, pantry hours, and the like) would stay. No other building signage was proposed.
Discussion
Chair Alice Mitinger confirmed it is a like-for-like dimensional replacement and that the community-center use continues. She asked about the other door signs and oriented the Board with an aerial of the intersection, roughly a block and a half from Zone 1 police. Whitehead said Goodwill has put about $2 million into the facility since 2022. LaShawn Burton-Faulk and John Richardson had no questions. No one commented in the room or online.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision pending. The Board accepted the exhibits and will issue a written decision within the time the Code allows.
Zoning Case 139 of 2026 — 1802 Mount Joseph Street (Carrick)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Variance from Section 912.04.K.1 for a fence in an R2-L district: 4 feet is the maximum height in an exterior side setback; a 6-foot fence is proposed (BDA-2026-05221; agenda also lists BDA-2026-05521). The City cited the property in March 2026 for building a fence without a permit. Resident Clyde Joseph Grimes Sr. said he installed the fence about 12 years ago (around 2013), replacing hedges that were roughly the same height. The 6-foot section runs along Newitt Street on the uphill side of a steep, non-square corner; the Mount Joseph Street frontage is at about 4 feet. Stop signs control Mount Joseph; Newitt is free-flowing uphill. Contractor Clyde Joseph Grimes (same family name; identified as the contractor who filed the corrective permit) also appeared.
Discussion
Mitinger focused on corner visibility. Grimes said Duquesne Light later moved a frequently hit utility pole inward, which narrowed the sight triangle further, and that a neighbor with a pool has fencing closer in from the property line. He pointed to other tall fences a block away. Mitinger said similar fences might also draw citations and that the Board has to weigh visibility on a free-flowing uphill street. Burton-Faulk and Richardson had no additional questions. No one commented.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision pending. The Board will issue a written decision within the 45 days the Code allows.
Zoning Case 145 of 2026 — 1500 Monterey Street (Central Northside)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Subdivision and construction of a residential unit above an existing garage, with variances from Section 903.03.E.2 (15-foot rear setback required, 0 feet proposed for the two-family dwelling; 5-foot interior side setback required, 0 feet requested for the garage) and a special exception under Section 914.07.G.2 for off-site parking in the existing garage for the two-family dwelling (DCP-LOT-2026-00201). Presenter Mr. Dannino (first name not confirmed on the recording) said owner Dr. Marcus / Monterey Alliance controls three parcels: an existing townhouse, a vacant lot, and 1500 Monterey, an old commercial building now occupied as a duplex with a four-car garage behind it and a floral-shop occupancy in the basement that the team said would end. The plan would subdivide along Jacksonia, add a third-floor addition over the duplex (staying at two units), and put a one-story studio apartment on top of the garage as its own lot. The team said the split lets the work proceed under one- and two-family residential code.
Discussion
Mitinger said the subdivision creates the setback and off-site-parking requests and looks like "creating your own hardship." She also flagged that expanding the floor area of a nonconforming two-unit use in an R1A district may need a separate special-exception review under Section 921.02, including the Code’s 15% expansion limit, and asked staff to look at that. The team walked through elevations and said most of Jacksonia is three-story rowhouses, with this four-car garage a unique streetscape condition. A longtime neighbor testified in support, describing decades of absentee-landlord problems and violence at the corner and saying the new owner-occupied plan would complete the four corner buildings and improve the block. No opposition was heard.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision pending. The Board accepted the exhibits and will issue a written decision within the time the Code allows.
Zoning Case 133 of 2026 — 113 Guadalupe Place (Central Northside)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Special exception under Section 911.02 for single-unit attached dwellings in the Hillside (H) district, plus variances from Section 911.04.A.69(a) (construction on land with more than 30% existing slope) and Section 911.04.A.69(b) (removing more than 2,400 square feet of vegetation) for townhouses at 113–119 Guadalupe Place (BDA-2026-06177). Owner-builder Chris Holsbeck (Fuels Beck and Co.; spelling as heard) said the site was before the Board in Case 205 of 2019 for six attached houses; only part of that work was finished before the approvals expired. The revised plan combines four units into one attached row rather than two-and-two, with Guadalupe Place as a private drive looping to rear driveways up the hillside off West Jefferson. Holsbeck showed front/back renderings and a revegetation plan and said drainage work and dead-tree removal are partly done but not finished.
Discussion
Mitinger compared the request to the 2019 record and asked about slope location, the natural stream uphill, and stormwater. Neighbor Mr. Hendrickson of 521 West Jefferson (online) opposed on runoff and hillside vegetation grounds, saying moderate rain already sends ankle-deep flow down West Jefferson onto Monterey and that severe storms have put water in his basement. He asked for more engineering diligence and an independent assessment. Mitinger said engineering, retaining walls, and on-site water management are PLI’s job, not the Board’s, and asked the parties to exchange information through staff rather than on the record. Holsbeck said he expects a third-party engineer requirement. The Board said it would consider the neighbor’s written statement, the testimony, the exhibits, and the prior decision.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision pending. The Board will issue a written decision within the 45 days the Code allows.
Zoning Case 142 of 2026 — 2501 Banksville Road (Banksville)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
In the news: Proposed Sheetz in Banksville faces scrutiny over gas station rules — Tribune-Review, May 2026.
Summary of Case
Special exception under Section 911.02 for a service station and variance from Section 911.04.A.65(f), which requires service stations to be at least 150 feet from the nearest residential district; the former Rite Aid site at Banksville Road and Wenzell Avenue is about 30 feet from an R1D district (BDA-2025-12833). Attorney Ryan Wotus presented for Sheetz. The Board heard the project on May 7, 2026 (then Zoning Case 25 of 2026) and issued a July 17, 2026 decision finding the convenience-store retail use permitted as of right and the special-exception criteria met except for the 150-foot spacing rule. Today’s hearing was limited to that variance, with the prior record and decision incorporated. The revised site plan moves the fuel canopy and drops a previously discussed drive-through. Wotus argued easements, grade, and a reciprocal access easement with the adjoining Aldi limit where fuel can sit, and pointed to other Banksville corridor gas and auto uses next to residential districts for context.
Discussion
Mitinger stressed that the 150-foot rule is parcel-to-parcel, not an internal layout standard, and that nearby stations don’t help unless the Board knows how they were approved. An objector (Mr. Wordis / standing contested; name as heard) and counsel pressed whether the request is a dimensional variance or a use variance and whether the objector has standing. Mitinger directed both sides to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law on standing and the variance, focused on those issues rather than re-briefing the special exception. After a scheduling discussion around Thanksgiving, the Board set a December 3, 2026 submittal date and said it would aim to decide before year-end.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision pending. The Board accepted the exhibits and testimony, set December 3, 2026 for proposed findings, and said it would issue a written decision by the end of 2026.
Zoning Case 124 of 2026 — 1811 South 18th Street (South Side Slopes)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Protest appeal of a zoning approval for a construction-contractor (general) use in the UI district (DCP-PAP-2026-00199). Zoning staff (administrator’s name unclear on the recording) said the May 2026 application was reviewed as the closest listed use, that planning and DOMI approved it in July after the applicant affirmed residential-compatibility standards (noise, hours, vibration, screening) and addressed curb-cut comments, and that the appeal was filed August 6. Protestant Nick Fox of 128 Pas Street (as heard), uphill from the site, said the operation is a daily transfer station for broken concrete, dirt, rock, and debris, that no one has inspected actual compliance, and that loading within 200 feet of R1 homes violates residential compatibility. Attorney Ryan Wotus appeared for the property owner. Councilmember Bob Charland attended in support of the neighbors.
Discussion
Mitinger asked whether compatibility is inspected or only affirmed on paper, and whether PLI has looked at the site since the protest. Neighbors and Charland described dust, diesel fumes, and daytime operations they say don’t match what was approved. The owner’s side said the use is allowed in UI and that compatibility can be addressed through enforcement and operational changes. Mitinger was unwilling to impose new conditions from the bench without a sit-down and pressed for a meeting among Charland’s office, the neighbors, and the owner to see what enforcement or practice changes are possible. She said a protest appeal isn’t the cleanest tool for an ongoing compatibility fight and that the Board still has to decide the appeal once that conversation happens.
Decision
Continued. The Board continued the hearing until the parties meet with Councilmember Charland’s office. Staff will help exchange contact information off the public record.
Summary prepared with the assistance of AI from the public YouTube recording. This is not an official City of Pittsburgh record.
