Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Summary - October 1, 2026
On October 1, 2026, the Pittsburgh Zoning Board of Adjustment heard four cases—a Strip District hillside workshop use, a North Oakland front-yard parking pad, a Bloomfield painted wall sign, and a Perry South Urban Impact Foundation renovation—and continued three others: a Garfield two-unit occupancy for lack of timely exhibits, a South Side Slopes protest appeal by agreement, and a Polish Hill overflow-shelter special exception so the Polish Hill Civic Association can review a late-filed operations plan before a November 12 rehearing. Recording: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8JkKDnYXOk
Hearing and Action
Zoning Case 130 of 2026 — 5105 Dearborn Street (Garfield)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Review of use of the property for two dwelling units (BDA-2026-05675) under Section 911.02 in an R1D-H district in Garfield—described on the agenda as obtaining occupancy for a nonconforming two-unit use.
Discussion
Applicant Jim Roberts was not on Zoom when the case was called and emailed staff in real time about sending exhibits. Chair Alice Mitinger and member LaShawn Burton-Faulk (appearing virtually) said exhibits are due the Tuesday before the hearing, not minutes before, and preferred to reschedule so the Board can review materials in advance. No one in the room or online raised concerns when the Chair invited comment on the continuance.
Decision
Continued to the following week's ZBA meeting at 9:30 a.m. so the applicant can submit exhibits on time.
Zoning Case 125 of 2026 — 2618 Brereton Street (Strip District)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Variance from Section 911.02 to allow an unlisted use similar to an art or music studio—not permitted in the Hillside (H) district—for an existing two-story garage-style building used as a workshop/storage on the ground floor and small-scale clothing fabrication upstairs (BDA-2025-12408). Architect Nathan Hart (Architec) described a roughly mid-century concrete-block commercial garage at the end of a dead-end hillside pocket between Bigelow Boulevard and the Strip. The clothing maker works alone by appointment shipping, with no client visits; neighbors submitted letters of support after a prior street landslide introduced them to the Board process.
Discussion
Mitinger oriented the Board to the cul-de-sac pocket and asked about residential use (none planned) and hours (essentially daytime as needed). Burton-Faulk had no additional questions. No public commenters appeared in the room or online. The Board also accepted neighbor letters of support into the record.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision deferred. The Board accepted the exhibits and said it would issue a written decision within the time permitted under the Zoning Code.
Zoning Case 127 of 2026 — 314 S Neville Street (North Oakland)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Variance from Section 922.15.A.2.a (front-yard parking prohibited) for a single-bay parking pad at a two-family occupancy on the corner of South Neville and Fillmore (BDA-2026-04564). Presenter Fred Galvez (Investment and Enterprise) and owner Robert Harper said DOMI steered them off a Neville curb cut because of the 25'-wide lot and setbacks, so the pad would take access from Fillmore into the Neville front yard. They argued the rear is blocked by grade and a higher Carnegie Mellon parcel, that institutional parking and student rentals have crowded the street, and that Harper is among the last long-term owner-occupiers nearby.
Discussion
Mitinger pressed on unique hardship versus other Neville lots, the minimum variance size (versus preferring extra concrete), and landscaping/screening so Neville does not face a bare pad. Harper described practicing the Fillmore turnaround with cones, said hedges and roses would remain, and pointed to other paved front yards nearby—which the Chair said are not precedents if those pads were unapproved. The Board asked the team to supplement with more area photos along Neville and Fillmore.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision deferred. The Board accepted the exhibits (with a request for supplemental context photos) and said it would issue a written decision within the time permitted under the Zoning Code.
Zoning Case 129 of 2026 — 4506 Penn Avenue (Bloomfield)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Variance from Section 919.03.M.5(a) for a painted wall sign: 80 sf maximum wall-sign area permitted; 425 sf requested (BDA-2025-12516). The City had cited the painted wall facing Penn and Friendship (CF-PLI-2026-042935). Applicant Domin Walbert of Viva Skin Lounge said the business moved locations, painted the building white under other permits, and put the company name on the large side wall so clients could find it near Children's Hospital; she characterized it as wayfinding more than advertising and acknowledged skipping sign approval.
Discussion
Mitinger explained variance hardship and minimum-relief standards and noted the Board was being asked for forgiveness after the fact—if asked beforehand it might have allowed some signage well below 425 sf. Burton-Faulk clarified front versus rear/parking-side signage. No public commenters appeared.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision deferred. The Board accepted the exhibits and said it would issue a written decision within the time permitted under the Zoning Code.
Zoning Case 119 of 2026 — 2731 N Charles Street (Perry South)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Renovation for Urban Impact Foundation programming (BDA-2026-04946): special exception under Section 921.02.A.4 to change a nonconforming use to an unlisted use similar to a school; variance from Section 921.02.A.1 for expansion of a nonconforming use beyond the 15% maximum (25% requested); and variance from Section 912.04.E for accessory-structure height (15' max; 23' requested). The architecture team (including Jennifer Scrippack) described retaining a large red-brick building for classrooms, dance/theater, and tutoring while demolishing a secondary structure and replacing it with a taller workshop/set-construction accessory building across from Fowler Park. They said programmable floor-area expansion stays under ~15%, while lot-coverage math drives the ~854 sf / 25% variance, about half for accessibility elevator/stair towers.
Discussion
Mitinger focused the team on the use findings and the dimensional variances rather than site landscaping views, clarified what would go in the brick building versus the new accessory structure, and asked about hours and whether the project expands who is served or mainly consolidates existing North Side programming. The team said both—more localized space with some growth for ages 4–18—and that hours would match other Urban Impact sites, not late-night events. No public commenters raised hands; the applicant noted two letters of support.
Decision
Hearing closed; decision deferred. The Board accepted the exhibits and said it would issue a written decision within the time permitted under the Zoning Code.
Zoning Case 124 of 2026 — 1811 South 18th Street (South Side Slopes)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
Summary of Case
Protest appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s approval of a construction-contractor (general) use on the property (DCP-PAP-2026-00199 / related BDA-2026-04247).
Discussion
The Chair announced at the call that the case would not be heard that morning.
Decision
Continued to the following week's ZBA meeting at 9:00 a.m.
Zoning Case 135 of 2026 — 3567 Bigelow Boulevard (Polish Hill)
City materials: Case packet · Meeting agenda
In the news: Polish Hill split over proposed new shelter as zoning board delays hearing — PublicSource, October 1, 2026.
Summary of Case
Special exception under Section 911.02 for interim housing / change of use to an overflow shelter in the UNC district (BDA-2026-08072)—the Allegheny County Department of Human Services proposal for a year-round, low-barrier overnight shelter discussed in local coverage.
Discussion
Before opening a full hearing, Mitinger flagged that an operational management plan had only recently reached the Board and that a development activities / RCO process with Polish Hill Civic Association would let neighbors and the applicant work through concerns before the Board applies the special-exception standards. Attorney Michael Korn (Leech Tishman), for neighbors Faye and Kevin Boland, agreed to a continuance. A Polish Hill Civic Association representative likewise supported continuing so the RCO can hold a meeting (date to be set with the applicant) to review the operations plan. Mitinger apologized to the large crowd that had come to testify, stressed that zoning is not decided by a show of hands, and said the Board’s practice is to grant one RCO-requested continuance when the applicant consents. Staff noted October agendas were full; the next available noticed date was November 12.
Decision
Continued to November 12, 2026, with posted notice, so Polish Hill Civic Association can hold an RCO/development-activities-style meeting on the operations plan before the Board opens the special-exception hearing.
Summary prepared with the assistance of AI from the public YouTube recording. This is not an official City of Pittsburgh record.
