In a tense and frustrating meeting on Wednesday, Pittsburgh’s Historic Review Commission took an unusual stance, voting “no recommendation” on whether Donny’s Place—a shuttered Polish Hill gay bar—should become the city’s first LGBTQ+ historic landmark.
The 3-1 vote means the nomination now moves to Pittsburgh’s Planning Commission on March 25, where the fight for recognition—and preservation—continues. Ultimately, the final decision rests with City Council.
Operating for nearly 50 years, Donny’s Place — originally the Norreh Social Club — holds a unique place in Pittsburgh’s LGBTQ+ history. Many considered it a sanctuary for the community—hosting drag pageants, leather competitions, HIV/AIDS memorials, and fundraisers—during decades when queer people had far fewer safe spaces.
Despite its cultural importance, the estate of its late owner, Donny Thinnes, and Laurel Communities, the housing developer he partnered with in 2019, have pushed back hard against historic designation. Their goal? Demolishing the building for a planned 19-unit housing development.
As part of their opposition, estate attorneys filed a lawsuit in February against the nomination’s co-sponsors, Polish Hill residents Lizzie Anderson and Matthew Cotter—an aggressive move that many see as an intimidation tactic.
During Wednesday’s meeting, Jonathan Kamin, the estate and developer’s lawyer, leaned on a little-used city rule to extend his questioning of Anderson, Cotter, and historian Dade Lemanski far beyond the standard 10-minute limit. Kamin pressed the nominators on their personal experiences at Donny’s, but on legal advice, they refused to engage with irrelevant questions, sticking to the validity of the nomination itself.
Meanwhile, Kamin attempted to downplay Donny’s significance, calling it just one of many gay bars and highlighting the building’s poor condition—including a recent fire and a structural report recommending demolition. However, physical condition is not a factor in historic designation, making the argument legally irrelevant.
The Historic Review Commission engaged in nearly an hour of debate, with starkly different opinions on the nomination. Chairperson Lucia Aguirre argued that Donny’s Place was clearly significant, citing its role as a safe space for a marginalized community. Commissioner Karen Loysen agreed, emphasizing that many queer spaces had to operate in secrecy, making them less visible to outsiders. Commissioner Richard Snipe, however, was skeptical, noting he had passed the bar countless times without realizing it was an LGBTQ+ venue—leading him to question whether it had “significance to everybody.” Commissioner James Hill worried that other LGBTQ+ sites in Pittsburgh might be more deserving, saying a broader effort was needed.
Despite receiving 100 letters of support and only six in opposition, the commission ultimately voted for “no recommendation” instead of outright rejecting the nomination.
With the nomination heading to the Planning Commission on March 25, supporters have another chance to push for recognition. If it advances, Pittsburgh City Council will make the final call.
But the legal battle continues. The lawsuit against Anderson and Cotter remains unresolved, raising serious concerns about whether legal intimidation tactics will discourage future efforts to protect Pittsburgh’s queer history.
