The Pittsburgh Historic Review Commission (HRC) failed to reach consensus Mar. 5 on whether the former Donny’s Place gay bar should be designated as a City of Pittsburgh historic site. Once a hub of LGBTQ nightlife and public health research in the early stages of the HIV/AIDS crisis, the former Donny’s Place is on track to become the first officially recognized LGBTQ landmark in Southwestern Pennsylvania.
However, without a positive HRC recommendation, that path becomes more difficult — Pittsburgh City Council will now have 120 days after a City Planning Commission hearing to decide the property’s fate.
Lizzie Anderson and Matthew Cotter collaborated with writer Dade Lemanski and Preservation Pittsburgh to research and write the nomination submitted to the HRC last October. The nomination makes the case for preserving Donny’s Place because of its ties to important events and people: LGBTQ history, public health initiatives during the HIV/AIDS crisis, its associations with owner Donald Thinnes, and as a familiar visual feature in the Polish Hill neighborhood.
Queer history under fire
After Donald Trump returned to the White House in January, the federal government has commenced a concerted effort to erase all recognition of trans and queer culture from federal agencies and websites. In February, historians began posting on social media that reports and articles they had written for federal agencies had been edited to remove references to trans people or that they had been deleted altogether. By Feb. 20, the National Park Service had deleted a 32-chapter LGBTQ Heritage Theme Study it published in 2016.
“There was a possibility that Trump would win,” says Anderson. “And we knew there was all of this rhetoric around the country demonizing trans children, especially parents, athletes, any person who just is living their lives and had some modicum of safety or we were building some modicum of safety.”
But the speed and breadth of the new administration’s actions have been shocking. Anderson thinks the recent moves to erase LGBTQ people and their histories underscore the need to preserve Donny’s Place.
“We knew there was a possibility all of this could come to a head, but honestly I didn’t know it would be like it is now. And it’s terrifying and it’s rage filled. I feel rage filled,” says Anderson. “There’s really something about the building itself — and the safety and life and possibility and passion and desire and just normal actions of going to a bar with your friends and being able to be exactly who you were there — that continues to feel incredibly salient.”
A contested present and future
In February, the HRC determined that the nomination was viable, i.e., that it meets at least two criteria for designation: for its ties to a significant person (Thinnes) and its ties to Pittsburgh’s LGBTQ culture. A property must meet one out of ten criteria to be designated a city historic site.
Jonathan Kamin, an attorney representing the Thinnes estate and developer Laurel Communities, told the HRC in February that his clients had filed a lawsuit against the two nominators, Lizzie Anderson and Matthew Cotter.
The suit alleges that the nomination is a smokescreen for Polish Hill residents opposing the development. The complaint filed in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas charges that Anderson and Cotter are engaging in a “concerted effort to illegally interfere with the development of the property.”
Anderson says that she and Cotter have hired an attorney. She describes the complaint as a SLAPP, a strategic lawsuit against public participation.
“We feel confident we have and will continue to just be exercising our rights of free speech and our abilities to be able to petition the city about our desires for our neighborhood and also this building in particular,” says Anderson. She noted that Governor Josh Shapiro signed legislation last year protecting citizens against SLAPPs.
Pro-Housing Pittsburgh, a local chapter of YIMBY Action, also opposes the designation.
“The present nomination is wholly intended to halt the redevelopment of the parcel,” wrote Pro-Housing Pittsburgh founder David Vatz in a statement submitted to the HRC ahead of the hearing.
Anderson and Cotter rallied 100 people to write letters to the HRC supporting the nomination. Most of the letters came from members of Pittsburgh’s LGTBQ community and the Polish Hill neighborhood.
Besides Vatz and the attorneys representing the developer and the Thinnes estate, four people also submitted statements opposing the nomination. One of them was a former Donny’s Place bartender.
Anderson and Lemanski, appearing via Zoom, made a brief presentation to the HRC, recapping the site’s history with slides using Heinz History Center archives photos in the Donald Thinnes collection.
Kamin, appearing in person, then distributed copies of a structural engineer’s report, Thinnes’ will, and other documents to the HRC. He demanded an opportunity to question Thomas Yorgy, the real estate professional who helped Thinnes assemble 34 Polish Hill parcels and whom Thinnes named as his executor. Citing the city’s historic preservation law, Kamin also asked to cross-examine the nominators, Anderson, Cotter, and Lemanski.
In a contentious exchange in which the nominators would only answer questions about the property’s history and the nomination, Kamin repeatedly asked about their previous statements at a December 2024 development activities meeting and last month’s viability meeting. The nominators declined to answer those questions on advice of counsel because of the pending litigation.
The HRC heard from Preservation Pittsburgh’s Melissa McSwigan and Polish Hill resident and former Donny’s Place patron Caleb Gamble in support of the nomination. Jack Billings said that he opposed the nomination. “I’m a member of the Pittsburgh Queer Kink Community,” Billings said. He told the HRC that he had attended events at Donny’s Place and that the nominators had never reached out to the Pittsburgh Queer Kink Community about the nomination.
Billings is also a member of Pro-Housing Pittsburgh. “This is a transparent attempt by people in Polish Hill who don’t want there to be development at Donny’s Place,” he said via Zoom.
Unable to agree
After closing testimony, the HRC debated whether the former Donny’s Place meets the criteria for designation as a historic site. Discussion centered on the two criteria recommended in the viability meeting.
Chairperson Lucia Aguirre argued that the property meets at least one criterion, as a culturally significant place in Pittsburgh history. She cited the 100 letters supporting the nomination and the building’s compelling history. Aguirre said that the site should be preserved because it tells the story of a historically marginalized group of Pittsburghers. “I don’t want to be a part of that erasure,” she said.
Commissioner Richard Snipe didn’t find anything significant about the property and he made a motion to forward a negative recommendation to Pittsburgh City Council. Aguirre, unable to second the motion because she is the chair, couldn’t find a second for the motion. Planning Department staff advising the HRC reminded them of a third option in the city’s law: to forward no recommendation at all.
Snipe withdrew his earlier motion and made a new one to forward no recommendation. That motion passed with three commissioners — Snipe, James Hill, and Karen Loysen — voting in favor and one (Aguirre) against it. Commissioner Katie Reed abstained and Commissioner Mattew Falcone had recused himself ahead of the hearing. Commissioner David Green was not present.
The HRC hearing is the first step in a three-part process. The nomination next goes to the City Planning Commission. There, commissioners will take into account the property’s history and how a potential designation might impact the city’s planning and land use objectives.
The HRC and Planning Commission decisions are advisory. The final decision rests with City Council. The 120-day clock for councilors to decide on Donny’s Place’s fate begins after the Planning Commission vote. Councilors will decide if Pittsburgh will get its first LGBTQ historic landmark. No date has been selected for the Planning Commission hearing.
This article appears in Feb 26 – Mar 4, 2025.
